# Zymol Passing off?



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

Further to a thread which originally started to show the difference between Royale and Atlantique if I'm correct. The subject moved to Zymol and their permittance of using their name etc

There was limited clarity on the issue of whether you are allowed to state as fact that you use Glasur for example if you detail as a business.

I have just been in touch with their Europe customer service and they have said that even mentioning that you use say, Carbon, for one of your details is not permitted as it counts as 'Passing Off'.

I don't 100% agree but I am not in the position to argue with a much larger company. I also received from them, their application for Approved detailer status.

Just thought I would pass that on as it was a post on here which led me to the enquiry.

Hopefully that will inform those who detail for a business.

By all means I don't agree with this passing off as I feel it is a statement of fact, however, I don't like their products that much that I want to risk it.


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

I think the situation is quite simple.

Zymol have no problem with any members of the public who use their products and post pictures etc on places like DW.

They do have a problem when professional detailers, not authorised by them, use and advertise that they use, Zymol.

You could argue that this is a big company bullying smaller companies into paying for authorisation

They would argue that they are protecting their brand and have every right to do so

You pays your money......


----------



## craigeh123 (Dec 26, 2011)

Do you have to pay to be authorized? If you do i think that speaks volumes


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

craigeh123 said:


> Do you have to pay to be authorized? If you do i think that speaks volumes


Yes you do. You pay to be authorised and then you can use the name. Works like a franchise.


----------



## psaiko (May 8, 2009)

It's a bit tricky. I am from Germany and if I like I can be a authorised Swizol Detailer. You have to pay money to get part of this "family".

Without being authorised as a Swizol Detailer/Partner you are not allowed to mention that you are doing Swizol Details. BUT they cannot forbid that you mention that you use Swizol products to getting the job done. To get 100% legal you should also mention some other brands you are working with.


There is no existing law (in Germany) that forbids to mention with which equipment you are working. 

Of Course you are not allowed to mention a status of a approved detailer if you are not paying for the licence. Additional you are not allowed to use the official logo of the brands.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

So if you are a professional detail and say that you use Zymol products you have to pay for the privilege?
Not that I'd pay because it's already overpriced :lol:


----------



## Lowiepete (Mar 29, 2009)

xJay1337 said:


> So if you are a professional detail and say that you use Zymol products you have to pay for the privilege?


So, reverse the situation. You've paid and someone who hasn't undercuts you. 
How do you feel?

Regards,
Steve


----------



## Porkypig (Jun 20, 2012)

Oh yes you pay, and you pay VERY handsomely too.

I got my hands on the 'approved detailer / stockist / retailer pack' a while back and if memory serves it was about £15k to get on board... :doublesho


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Lowiepete said:


> So, reverse the situation. You've paid and someone who hasn't undercuts you.
> How do you feel?
> 
> Regards,
> Steve


Undercuts what? Undercuts in cost for the detail service provided?
Quality of work sells, not the price.


----------



## stangalang (Nov 27, 2009)

craigeh123 said:


> Do you have to pay to be authorized? If you do i think that speaks volumes


Yes. Over 10k a year now I think


----------



## GarveyVW (Jun 28, 2013)

stangalang said:


> Yes. Over 10k a year now I think


What the...:doublesho


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

GarveyVW said:


> What the...:doublesho


It might have changed since I looked but it was £15,000 for Zymol plus c£5000 to be approved

These were one off fees, no ongoing costs


----------



## stangalang (Nov 27, 2009)

And I don't know if it's still the same, but last time I spoke with an authorised detailer, he didn't get to take advantage of the rather expensive "free" refills either, due to being proffesional and using the waxes for business


----------



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

xJay1337 said:


> So if you are a professional detail and say that you use Zymol products you have to pay for the privilege?
> Not that I'd pay because it's already overpriced :lol:


Exactly that. I wanted to do just that but they won't allow it as it falls under 'Passing off'. I thought it was statement of fact seeing as you are free to buy it and do with it what you want really.

Like I said earlier, I'm not that keen that I want to push anyone's buttons

I think I will be approaching swissvax instead and see where it takes me

I must admit, however, I do really like the Zymol pots. A touch of excellance:thumb:


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

Quite simple, if it becomes a problem on here just ban the name loɯʎz again like years ago.
Personally i think they are in cloud cuckoo land, most companies would pay you to advertise their products at such a high end.


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

HeavenlyDetail said:


> Quite simple, if it becomes a problem on here just ban the name loɯʎz again like years ago.
> Personally i think they are in cloud cuckoo land, most companies would pay you to advertise their products at such a high end.


That's what I would have thought.

I guess the reasoning might be if a so called pro does a shoddy job and (prep wise) and goes and puts hundreds of pounds worth of wax it may appear that the wax is to blame or that it just isn't that good.


----------



## Lowiepete (Mar 29, 2009)

xJay1337 said:


> Undercuts what?


Isn't it obvious? If someone who hasn't paid their "dues" goes on to make claim 
for this or that product use, isn't that simply undercutting those who have? It 
doesn't only apply to this wax manufacturer, look at the businesses in the UK 
that got bullied in 2012 just for having 'Olympic' in their name...

So, stop being a politician and answer the question; If roles were reversed and
you _had_ paid out several K of wonga, how miffed would you be? I'm not 
saying that such charges are in any way justified, that's a whole new ball-park...

Regards,
Steve


----------



## danwel (Feb 18, 2007)

stangalang said:


> Yes. Over 10k a year now I think


Give over...that must be a wind up! I'd hope it comes with a happy ending!


----------



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

Lowiepete said:


> Isn't it obvious? If someone who hasn't paid their "dues" goes on to make claim
> for this or that product use, isn't that simply undercutting those who have? It
> doesn't only apply to this wax manufacturer, look at the businesses in the UK
> that got bullied in 2012 just for having 'Olympic' in their name...
> ...


You havnt had a run in of this nature before have you???

I think the point that some of us are referencing is the statement of which products you use.

As opposed to

Claiming to be an authorised Detailer

from my limited time this always seem to be heated subject lol.

Steve, I am pretty sure that if someone claims to be an authorised detailer when they are not they will know about it pretty sharpish.


----------



## suspal (Dec 29, 2011)

HeavenlyDetail said:


> Quite simple, if it becomes a problem on here just ban the name loɯʎz again like years ago.
> Personally i think they are in cloud cuckoo land, most companies would pay you to advertise their products at such a high end.


some do not naming names :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Had to check on Wikipedia what "passing off" mend.
The requirements to forefill to the term "passing off", are;



> Required elements
> 
> There are three elements, often referred to as the Classic Trinity, in the tort which must be fulfilled:
> 
> ...


Source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_off

In my opinion if you just mention that you used for example Zymöl Carbon as an LSP, this isn't passing off, because you don't state you are an autorized Zymöl detailer. So there isn't a case of mispresentation.

However when you are a pro detailer and mention on your website that you can give your customers car a Zymöl treatment, this can be misrepresented as you are being a autorized Zymöl detailer.


----------



## Lowiepete (Mar 29, 2009)

Otto said:


> You haven't had a run in of this nature before have you???


No, but sometimes things can get very silly. Not long after British Rail was
privatised a railway modeller, who had quite faithfully reproduced a certain
company's logo on one of his model locos, found himself being chased by said
company for all sorts of infringements, just because a picture of this loco 
appeared in a national model railway magazine. Complete jobs-worth nonsense, 
except it gave the guy on the receiving end many sleepless nights!

Regards,
Steve


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Lowiepete said:


> Isn't it obvious? If someone who hasn't paid their "dues" goes on to make claim
> for this or that product use, isn't that simply undercutting those who have? It
> doesn't only apply to this wax manufacturer, look at the businesses in the UK
> that got bullied in 2012 just for having 'Olympic' in their name...
> ...


I think you miss the point of the whole discussion.
Saying you use Zymol products doesn't mean that you are an authorized dealer, just that you use them.
People may be interested to know what products are used on their car, if they care about such nonsense believing that Zymol are a million times better than another brand... but I do not see why professionals using the product should have to pay £10k+ to be able to say that on a website.

This is the Autoglym Lifeshine debacle all over again.
Pay loads of money for something which means jack-****e.
Zymol will lose their customer base if they are not careful.


----------



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

Lose customers they will.

I was quite keen to purchase a range of various waxes from them but instead I shall be knocking on SV's door.

Their loss really and I would imagine it will be the same with a fair few people.

Hat off to them though if it's working in terms of exclusivity..


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

Otto said:


> Lose customers they will.
> 
> I was quite keen to purchase a range of various waxes from them but instead I shall be knocking on SV's door.
> 
> ...


Just playing devils advocate, so forgive me....

Imagine you are a professional detailer and you have paid for Zymol authorisation....wouldn't you want, and indeed expect, Zymol to stop un authorised detailers from advertising that they use the product?


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Lose customers? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

So many people on here get their knickers in a twist over Zymols costs.

Who cares, it doesn't affect me in anyway. The world will still turn, oceans will rise and fall and life will come and go as it all always has.

Zymol won't lose any customers because they charge what they want to use their name and associated branding and logos.

What will happen, is if the detailers can't afford it/don't want to pay then there'll be fewer approved detailers and the people that do want to use a Zymol approved Detailer will be left with only one company to use who just so happen to be related to Zymol Europe even though they're two separate companies.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Otto said:


> Lose customers they will.
> 
> I was quite keen to purchase a range of various waxes from them but instead I shall be knocking on SV's door.
> 
> ...


Why does that stop you using them?

Just do what most people do and buy the products and just don't advertise the fact.


----------



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

tricky tree said:


> Just playing devils advocate, so forgive me....
> 
> Imagine you are a professional detailer and you have paid for Zymol authorisation....wouldn't you want, and indeed expect, Zymol to stop un authorised detailers from advertising that they use the product?


Definetely in terms of 'Authorised Detailer Status'
However, the point at hand is the issue of stating that you use 'Wax A' for example merely as a statement of fact.

You are not stating you are affiliated in any way but just stating the product you are using.

It is an interesting subject and I originally posted this to reply to a previous post that was left unanswered but had attracted large discussion as this has.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Otto said:


> Definetely in terms of 'Authorised Detailer Status'
> However, the point at hand is the issue of stating that you use 'Wax A' for example merely as a statement of fact.
> 
> You are not stating you are affiliated in any way but just stating the product you are using.
> ...


Just say 'I use a prestige product from one of the worlds finest and oldest wax makers' or something like that


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

I think all brands are the same are they not? Pay a fee to use their products and name? Why bag Zymol about it?


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

suspal said:


> some do not naming names :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


:d


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

tricky tree said:


> Just playing devils advocate, so forgive me....
> 
> Imagine you are a professional detailer and you have paid for Zymol authorisation....wouldn't you want, and indeed expect, Zymol to stop un authorised detailers from advertising that they use the product?


Why would you, as long as the person in question isn't pretending he is a licensed detailer and no laws are breached.
The thing about such a licensed detailer, is that you would expect that he or she would have met too high standards to become one.
So it should be all about the title and not about the fact that someone mentions that he used a certain Zymöl wax as LSP.

And if it would be realy such a big problem for Zymöl that a pro detailer uses their products without being a licensed detailer, they simply shouldn't sell any products to them and also state on the products themselves something like "this product can only be used by private persons or licensed detailers".

I ordered a few years ago straight from Zymöl under a company name.
If they were realy faithfull to their resellers in Europe, you would expect them to turn me down and tell me to order from a European reseller.
And if they would be bothered that a non licensed detailer uses their products, why didn't they inform if I perhaps was a detailer by profession and just sold the goods to me?


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Frans D said:


> Why would you, as long as the person in question isn't pretending he is a licensed detailer and no laws are breached.
> The thing about such a licensed detailer, is that you would expect that he or she would have met too high standards to become one.
> So it should be all about the title and not about the fact that someone mentions that he used a certain Zymöl wax as LSP.
> 
> ...


You can do what you want with the wax, just don't advertise it on offer if you not accredited with Zymol. Easy. Same goes with most brands.

Ask any brand what it takes to be an accredited detailer and see what you get.


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Again, I can't believe that by law you are doing anything wrong, as long as you don't make it look like if you are a by Zymöl or any other brand licensed detailer.

Lets say I am a detailer by profession and I bought waxes of several brands, through my detailing company.
Next I create a website were I offer several grades of details and I make a list of waxes a customer can choose from, to apply on their car.
The day after I receive a email of one of the wax manufacturers, that I am not allowed to mention their waxes in the list.
If at the end this would come to court, I can't believe that a Judge would go along, with the manufacturer that I am misrepresenting and make it look like if I am a licensed detailer of that brand.
Especially if they sold their waxes directly to my detailing company, they should be aware that I would use it for my customers and offer it to them to apply on their cars.


----------



## Reflectology (Jul 29, 2009)

The issue is that marketing plays a massive part in the success (or viral infection) of most businesses let alone this one, Zimmamibob are trying to do away with freebie marketing and want people to stay true to a brand and not just jump on the next big thing (cough).

Now mentioning Zimmamibob on your website may cause you to get a phone call or email off them, as will showing products of theirs, which is clearly advertising their product, albeit for free they dont like it, so they try and put a stop to it, however they can only (and this is my opinion and thoughts on it) put a trademark on the Z word, although they have had success with the Royale, and a whole host of words that are free to use in the dictionary, heck they have even managed to get a trademark for the word Detail, sponge, glaze etc etc etc and the list goes on, not sure any of that would stand up in any court of law, as with Royale, we all know where that came from, so why have Daewoo made a car with the same name, and Ford come to mention it, yes i have visited Wikipedia but we all use it and so we should, its an advantageous source of information.

Yeah trademarks are distinguished by actual areas of business so using terms of their wax may break a few rules but pretty certain there is another Vintage wax out there, made by Scholl if i am not mistaken, so really the trademark could just be there to scare folk.

So just to put this into perspective. No one can use the word Detail in their business, no one can advertise that they use a glaze (not that i would, use a glaze that is, unless absolutely necessary), no one can use pretty much any word that is used on a daily basis in this industry, however having said that the trademark "z" has not been renewed and is dead, take that as you will.

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK00001543862

You can also look at the case history and the trademark has been removed from the register, however they have set a precedence with that particular TM so expect bother by using it.

Some may disagree with the above but as i say the internet is a great tool.


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

Frans D said:


> Again, I can't believe that by law you are doing anything wrong, as long as you don't make it look like if you are a by Zymöl or any other brand licensed detailer.
> 
> Lets say I am a detailer by profession and I bought waxes of several brands, through my detailing company.
> Next I create a website were I offer several grades of details and I make a list of waxes a customer can choose from, to apply on their car.
> ...


The issue is trademark infringement.....See below from Wiki

"Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attaching to a trademark *without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees* (provided that such authorization was within the scope of the license). Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers. An owner of a trademark may commence civil legal proceedings against a party which infringes its registered trademark. "


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Zymöl Europe mentioned "passing off" and not an infringment of their trademark.

And the way you put it would also mean, that I am not able to resell a certain product and using it by name in an advertisement.
This is however not the case, as you can use a brand and products name, whenever you have bought it and resell it afterwards.



> Exhaustion of trademark rights
> 
> When a trademarked product lawfully enters the market (e.g. because the trademark holder manufactured it and sold it in a store), the buyer may want to resell it, either on the same market, or at some entirely different market in a different country or region. As selling a trademarked product is use of the trademark in commerce, the trademark holder could block this resale by claiming trademark infringement. As this is not always fair, various countries have developed so-called "exhaustion" or "first sale" doctrines that regulate when a trademark holder can and cannot act against a reseller of 'his' products.


Source; http://www.iusmentis.com/trademarks/crashcourse/limitations/

I shall also try to find a specialized forum in such matters and ask their opinion.


----------



## Otto (Feb 2, 2013)

Alex L said:


> Just say 'I use a prestige product from one of the worlds finest and oldest wax makers' or something like that


I like this constructive alternative which I had not considered so thanks Alex L.

This seems to be turning quite heated and I think we need to look at this objectively.

Although as a detailer I would like to be able to say that I use product Z as this does go some way to show that you use high end products; however, if company X dosnt want me to state use of their product then neither do I.

I don't feel bad about it as it's their choice really. Why would you if they don't want you to regardless of law.

At the end of the day it's their brand they have established and although I think they should allow it(my personal opinion), it's not really our choice. I do respect that they have a higher agenda/ plan which we may not appreciate in our positions as a consumer/ detailer.


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

I think it's quite straightforward : if you are using their product to promote your business without their permission they will ask you to stop....

...this is quite normal in business.


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

I buy (through auctions) and sell products myself and it's quite normal to mention the products you sell by brand an name.
If I would receive an email, that I am not allowed to state a certain brand name in my sales, I would have a big laugh and wish them good luck in court.


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

Frans D said:


> I buy (through auctions) and sell products myself and it's quite normal to mention the products you sell by brand an name.
> If I would receive an email, that I am not allowed to state a certain brand name in my sales, I would have a big laugh and wish them good luck in court.


Oh, sorry, I was talking about detailers....as in if you were a professional detailer and advertised that you used Zymol without their authority they would ask you to stop.

Why not just register to be a reseller? Then you can buy it at a discount..


----------



## Carshine (Nov 11, 2009)

I dont get this...why should Zymöl have anything to say if one person, running a detailing company, uses Zymöl products? Is this a matter of copyright, is their logo being used in advertising or something?


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

Carshine said:


> I dont get this...why should Zymöl have anything to say if one person, running a detailing company, uses Zymöl products? Is this a matter of copyright, is their logo being used in advertising or something?


It is a matter of trademark. Using somebody else's trademark to promote your business. It's no different to a car dealer using the Ferrari logo on his website......if they find out they will ask him to stop...


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

tricky tree said:


> It is a matter of trademark. Using somebody else's trademark to promote your business. It's no different to a car dealer using the Ferrari logo on his website......if they find out they will ask him to stop...


Yes but what if that detailer says that they use Zymol products?
What is wrong with that.

That's like saying "I own a Ferrari."


----------



## Carshine (Nov 11, 2009)

Yes, if the detailer has a Zymöl sign on his wall or his website, I understand they do want to regulate this. But they cannot stop him from using their products in the business.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

And likewise saying "I use Zymol products"

Talk about being an ass! Fine i'm sure those that do use Zymol will happily use something else.


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

xJay1337 said:


> Yes but what if that detailer says that they use Zymol products?
> What is wrong with that.
> 
> That's like saying "I own a Ferrari."


Not quite.

Nothing wrong with saying I use Zymol on my car.

But if I want to use their trademark (Zymol) to promote my business, then I need to ask their permission.

Of course they can't stop detailers using the product, but they will try to stop those detailers who aren't authorised from advertising that they use it. And if you happen to be a detailer who is authorised you would probably agree.


----------



## Raging Squirrel (Aug 28, 2013)

wouldn't it just be easier to put a disclaimer on your website saying you are not affiliated with any of the suppliers, and only use their products?

My brothers mate sprays his own motorbike helmets and did himself an excellent Stormtrooper one from Star Wars, he had a photo printed in a mag and was approached by Lucas Arts threatening him with court action if he did not destroy the helmet!


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

tricky tree said:


> Not quite.
> 
> Nothing wrong with saying I use Zymol on my car.
> 
> ...


Okay - I understand as an enthusiast that is fine
However say I owned a company

Let's call it jizzlebizzle detailing.
And on my website I didn't have any company specific logos or anything 
But in the "what do I do and what products do I use" I state I use Zymol. No logos, nothing fancy, just "car wiped down with Z-8" or whatever (I have no idea what Zymol products are which just as an FYI )

Is that or is that not allowed. 
Because if that is not allowed then I would simply use another product -


----------



## Raging Squirrel (Aug 28, 2013)

yeah I agree with that


----------



## tricky tree (Apr 15, 2013)

xJay1337 said:


> Okay - I understand as an enthusiast that is fine
> However say I owned a company
> 
> Let's call it jizzlebizzle detailing.
> ...


If you state anywhere that you use Zymol for your business then you need their permission.

The way round it, is to say you use "high end waxes" without naming Zymol.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

High end waxes could also be Turtle Wax!
If I pay for Zymol and use it I can't see why I shouldn't be allowed to use it
Not because I am not capable.
Not because I have not completed training courses
But because I have spent *TEN GRAND* on the privilege?


----------



## wadoryu (Jan 28, 2010)

I'm pretty sure it's not quite expensive as being made out, with that money I believe it is 15k but that comes with all the waxes and full professional training. That's not bad in reality.
I was doing research on it a few months ago as HQ of uk zymol is based 8 miles up the road.


----------



## tom-225 (Aug 30, 2009)

xJay1337 said:


> High end waxes could also be Turtle Wax!
> If I pay for Zymol and use it I can't see why I shouldn't be allowed to use it
> Not because I am not capable.
> Not because I have not completed training courses
> But because I have spent *TEN GRAND* on the privilege?


It is because the big Z dont know if your capable. They charge their money to ensure only genuine people apply and to check their validity. The price will also mean you will be brand loyal.

What your not seeing guys is that say some cowboy does a hack detail then "says" he has used Vintage for example.

This will come back on Zymol and to the untrained person it will loom like Zymol have made bad products not that the detailer has done a poor job.

Zymol have nothing against professionals using the products. What they are doing is ensuring that only people they have trained and check advertise they use the stuff.

When you sell wax for 9k youve got to control how people advertise they use it. Like i say youve got to keep the cowboys away from advertising and dragging the company down.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

*When you sell wax for 9k youve got to control how people advertise they use it. Like i say youve got to keep the cowboys away from advertising and dragging the company down.*

Now that I can understand


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

xJay1337 said:


> If I pay for Zymol and use it I can't see why I shouldn't be allowed to use it


But you can use them:wall:

You just can't use their IP in any of your advertising.

It really couldnt be any simpler.


----------



## The Detail Doctor (Feb 22, 2008)

Well, that's Zymol off my shopping list


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

As I've mentioned before, if these companies and their representatives are happy to sell you their products in the first place, knowing your a business... then they are in theory, authorising you to use and endorse the brand as you please.


----------



## Reflectology (Jul 29, 2009)

Alex L said:


> But you can use them:wall:
> 
> *You just can't use their IP in any of your advertising*.
> 
> It really couldnt be any simpler.


Where is the intellectual property, as i pointed out in my previous thread, the Z trademark isn't actually at this point in time an actively registered trademark, they have the TM symbol at the end of various words like Detail and Glaze, yet these cannot be trademarked as its a word in a dictionary that is part of any given language. what they can do is form a trademark of given words to produce a brand, like z, or anyone else that has a brand.

As has been stated above, if they are openly selling this to the public domain imo they have given their permission for it to be used, however they do state that they use web crawlers to seek out any infringement to their TM.

So just dont use the word that begins with Z, although its not now a registered TM.


----------



## Reflectology (Jul 29, 2009)

tom-225 said:


> It is because the big Z dont know if your capable. They charge their money to ensure only genuine people apply and to check their validity. The price will also mean you will be brand loyal.
> 
> *What your not seeing guys is that say some cowboy does a hack detail then "says" he has used Vintage for example.
> 
> ...


Then they should not sell it on the open market if this is the case, yet they have resellers that sell every product they make.

It should be sold only to authorised Z detailers, its a catch 22, they either want the brand out there and getting used or they dont.

Lets face it there are many a detailer that is approved by Z and the same goes for swissvax, and this is not a dig at anyone in particular but how is 4 days going to prove to anyone that they are worthy enough of applying a brand they own.

Anyone can prepare to be on their game for a week.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Reflectology said:


> Where is the intellectual property, as i pointed out in my previous thread, the Z trademark isn't actually at this point in time an actively registered trademark, they have the TM symbol at the end of various words like Detail and Glaze, yet these cannot be trademarked as its a word in a dictionary that is part of any given language. what they can do is form a trademark of given words to produce a brand, like z, or anyone else that has a brand.
> 
> As has been stated above, if they are openly selling this to the public domain imo they have given their permission for it to be used, however they do state that they use web crawlers to seek out any infringement to their TM.
> 
> So just dont use the word that begins with Z, although its not now a registered TM.


That's a bit beyond me as I really know nothing about trademarks and should have just used 'branding and logos'

The way I see it is they have no problem with people using the products however they wish, they just have a problem with people using their branding to make money from the name.

And by becoming an approved detailer you pay for the privilege to use the branding and (apparently) their marketing strategies and your company is listed in the magazine advertisements*.

It's kind of like lapdancers paying the club to dance and earn there.

whilst I don't have a problem with what they do, I do think the sums they charge for what they offer are ridiculous and from conversations I've had with current and ex approved detailers unless you're the detailing company that works out of the same building they're a bit slow to help out**

*At a detailing day I was told all about the advertising you'd get if you were approved and they were waiting on proofs of the final advert with a list of all current detailers (this was a good 6-7 years ago).

** again this was conversations over 6 years ago.

And why is it always Zymol that gets singled out for this topic, another high end maker gets hate for their Liberace inspired containers and pricing and another for rebranding and selling for insane mark ups.

Too many people on here seem to have nothing better to do than inforce the stereotype that all Pommes whinge :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## David Wyllie (Jan 30, 2007)

You all should be standing up and applauding them for their ingenuity in marketing and of their brand awareness around the world. By restricting something they have heightened the need for their brand. By just looking at this thread and about 10,000 or more other threads around the world they don't count the number of times their name has been used, they weigh them. Basically in business if something looks like it is out of control it is being controlled.


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

David Wyllie said:


> You all should be standing up and applauding them for their ingenuity in marketing and of their braaffordable areness around the world. By restricting something they have heightened the need for their brand. By just looking at this thread and about 10,000 or more other threads around the world they don't count the number of times their name has been used, they weigh them. Basically in business if something looks like it is out of control it is being controlled.


True, but the brand isn't as popular as it was 7-10 years ago, nowadays boutique products are far more affordable, with a varied choice of manufacturers.


----------



## SteveyG (Apr 1, 2007)

I'm amazed how naive a lot of people on here are - this is standard business practice for all kinds of things. 

£10k a year is not a lot of money at all compared to other brands that enforce this. That 'Which?' logo that is on the box of loads of household products and white goods for example costs several times this. They have nothing to do with this, you just pay to use the logo.


----------



## The Pan Man (Apr 16, 2010)

In years gone by I used Fairy Liquid and all my mates knew it, Fairy never charged me a penny.

From what I have read on here Zymol would not have a leg to stand on in a court of law. It would be their word against yours, However if you were stupid enough to misrepresent yourself in writing (On you web site for example) then you would not have the standing leg. The trouble with common sense is it's not very common.


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

The name that begins with Z is a registered trademark.For those that have stated they are no longer going to purchase their products,in part due to reading this thread,should be aware of what the Anwander group did in 2001,made their own waxes,labelled them as Zymol,and then registered the Zymol name and Jar design in Switzerland.Anwander(Swizol,Swissol,Swissvax) is a former Zymol distributor.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

waxy said:


> The name that begins with Z is a registered trademark.For those that have stated they are no longer going to purchase their products,in part due to reading this thread,should be aware of what the Anwander group did in 2001,made their own waxes,labelled them as Zymol,and then registered the Zymol name and Jar design in Switzerland.Anwander(Swizol,Swissol,Swissvax) is a former Zymol distributor.


Do you have any links/proof of this?

Not doubting you, just like the reading :thumb:


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

http://uk.search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A...9/**http://eworldwire.com/pressreleases/10565


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

waxy said:


> http://uk.search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A...9/**http://eworldwire.com/pressreleases/10565


Thanks :thumb:

I was aware of the Name similarity dispute, I didn't realise they were repackaging their own waxes though. Very underhand.


----------



## richardr (Oct 21, 2013)

waxy said:


> http://uk.search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A...9/**http://eworldwire.com/pressreleases/10565


Just read all the thread and it makes interesting reading.

The law suit is interesting as well, i love the bit about carefully extracting the carnuba from the rain forest 

So i dont want any one using a draw string bag to keep their wax in if it doesnt start with a z

I hope the Z people dont attract the attention of our cousins in China because they will be right in the poop


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

This is one of the early Swizöl waxes that i have in my collection


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Very cool, never seen such a wax before. :thumb:
I have a pretty extended Zymöl collection (including Z3) and such a wax would be a nice addition.
Must keep an eye out if one ever comes up for sale.


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

It is very rare,i'm fortunate to have more than one.It would never be used by me,so i may consider putting one up for sale in the future.Do you have any other rare Zymöl waxes in your collection Frans?


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Well in that case I have to keep a close eye on your postings. 
The only "rare" wax I have from Zymöl is the Z3, as you cannot buy it anymore.
I wish I had more rarities, as I am kind of a wax collector.


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

a collector like myself.This is another rare one, Zymöl Fantasy Urethane from the 80's


----------



## Jdudley90 (Mar 13, 2011)

This collection gets better and better


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

And Fantasy Acrylic from the late 80's,early 1990's


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

Wow, never seen them, tnx for sharing. :argie:


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Wow, they're incredibly 80's :lol::lol::lol:


The Swizöl tub could almost pass off as Titanium, although the blues are slightly different.

Thanks for posting them Waxy :thumb:

One day we might actually see a real life Solaris, that would be awesome.


----------



## Goodylax (Apr 21, 2013)

Here is an old Swizol I picked up. Almost full
Saphire :thumb:

When I first saw it, I was like??????


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Goodylax said:


> Here is an old Swizol I picked up. Almost full
> Saphire :thumb:
> 
> When I first saw it, I was like??????


Looks like Ebony lol


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

Probably my favourite


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

Goodylax said:


> Here is an old Swizol I picked up. Almost full
> Saphire :thumb:
> 
> When I first saw it, I was like??????


Great pic,thanks for sharing This is one of the later Jars,when the waxes were given names,and just before Zymöl discovered their Jar design had been registered by Swizöl in switzerland.Mine are from the ''naughty'' period,when Swizöl were filling Zymöl Jars with their own wax products.


----------



## Goodylax (Apr 21, 2013)

waxy said:


> Probably my favourite


Wow, beautiful condition :thumb:
You have quite the collection!


----------



## Ebbe J (Jun 18, 2008)

waxy said:


> Great pic,thanks for sharing This is one of the later Jars,when the waxes were given names,and just before Zymöl discovered their Jar design had been registered by Swizöl in switzerland.Mine are from the ''naughty'' period,when Swizöl were filling Zymöl Jars with their own wax products.


Great information - when was this?

I still use the their sponges. A few years back there wasn't a wax thread on here without Glasur or the like getting mentioned - times do change.

Kind regards,

Ebbe


----------



## Frans D (May 23, 2011)

That jar, looks like it just been bought (new). 

Info is a bit spread on this, do you perhaps know the exact facts around Zymöl and Swissvax (kind of a history lesson)?


----------

