TiteBond Responce from Headquarters

[Mike Richardson]

What is wrong with advance advertising?

Yeah - that woudl be smart way to destroy 70 years of good will...

Mike

[RKON]

A Response like this makes me realize how people get so defensive over something they feel is the best. To me it is a sign of insecurity and the failure to admit they may be wrong in their purchasing decision or their favorite product. If you believe everything a corporation has to spew on you then I have some Enron stock to sell you, Firestone Tires for your Ford Explorer, or some swamp land in Louisiana. A perfect example of this is to go out to Edmunds.com and look at the comments on all of the vehicles people have bought. Everyone loves their vehicle it is the best and there is nothing wrong with their decision. Although, the vehicle has been in the shop 3 times to fix a weird smell from the a/c, the electronic door locks don't work properly and etc...

What did Wood Magazine have to lose by this evaluation? What does Titebond have tolose by the evaluation. It seems to me Titebond has more to lose.

Rich

[RKON]

The ANSI standards is a board consisting of industry companies writing the standards in which they create products that adhere to those standards. It is a nonprofit that gets all of its funding from all of the 100 dollar reports and member dues. It doesn't mean Sh&% to the consumer unless you are a gullible moron. there is nothing on ANSI.org geared for the consumer. Try doing a search. It is just a bunch of hogwash they use.

Franklin is trying to redefine the word for waterproof. Would you buy a pair of waterproof hip waders for fly fishing if you couldn't immerse the in water for more than 20 minutes?

In the software world there is always jockeying over the standards and what constitutes them. In the electronics world it is the same. A perfect example of standards today's is DVD's. It is an absolute cluster on how many different standards there are. Utterly confusing when picking out DVD media.

The standards for Glue is absolute Bull. It either works or it doesn't. I have both TBII and Elmer's and I really don't give a hoot. If Wood Magazine has exposed TB for what they are worth that is great. Isn't that what you want from the magazine? to Give you fair and unbiased information?

Rich

[J. Clarke]

Some people seem to labor under the impression that "business" (including the blind guy selling pencils on the street corner) is automatically evil and will never do anything but lie, cheat, steal, and eat babies unless monitored constantly by hordes of government inspectors, who we all know are always perfectly honest and incorruptible and would never interfere unnecessarily and are certain to be unfailingly polite.

[Doug Miller]

Meaningless. "There are quite a few older [fill in the blank] that will tell you that [fill in the blank] products just don't measure up..." works with almost anything you care to put in the blanks.

So the product always worked fine for you -- but you stopped using it because other people said they didn't like it.

How much sense does *that* make?

[Leon]

This morning I received an e-mail form Craig Stone and I have extended an invitation to him or a company representative to participate in the group. If some of you would also like for them to participate, please make that request to Titebond also so that I am not the only one they see offering the invitation.

[TBone]

Perhaps you should forward that question on to Mr. Stone.

[RKON]

I sent a letter this morning. They dod not address any of my concerns and did not address my queries on what the ANSI/HPVA standards are. My bottle of TB2 is going in the garbage. But is this response canned or what?

Good morning, thank you for your response. We defined Waterproof as outlined in the ANSI/HPVA standardized testing, which has been the benchmark for numerous years. It is a very tough procedure that measure the performance of each glue tested. The vast majority (if not all) manufacturers of polyurethane glues, construction adhesives, caulks, sealant, etc. indicate"waterpoof", on their labeling, when they in fact are not designed for continuous submersion or use below the waterline. (In our case, our claims are supported by a reputable testing procedure). Simply put, the liability is too significant for these types of applications and oftentimes, the substrates can't be controlled sufficiently. In my office right now, I have a dried film of Titebond II Premium Wood Glue that has been underwater for over 11 years...the film is fine. This would support the claim waterproof as you defined it..."Impervious to or unaffected by water". However, it is how the substrates around the glue line react to these conditions that could impact the overall strength and water-resistance of the bond.

Having said this, and living the ethical standards established by our privately-held organization for over 70 years, we absolutely stand behind our claim of waterproof for Titebond III as defined by the aforementioned criteria. In addition, the thousands of success stories of Titebond II over the past 13 years, as well as the performance of Titebond III over the past

4 months lends much more credibility than a magazine article.

Please note that we are strong partners of Wood Magazine, and together we have supported woodworking for a number of years. However, we completely disagree with the results published in this article and will be able to demonstrate scientifically many of the inaccuracies that we feel compromised our performance.

Finally, I'm quite concerned about your feelings regarding our product marketing efforts. As stated above, the ethical standards we support here at Franklin are extremely high, which is apparent throughout the woodworking industry as our product performance, technical support and commitment to woodworking is clearly demonstrated throughout all the top woodworking publications and associations. I am sorry that you question our marketing efforts; hopefully you have a better understanding of our position and ethical standards in comparison to industry-wide practices. We feel good about our position, our marketing efforts and again, completely stand behind our claims, regardless of the product.

Thanks again for your inquiry. Take care and have a great day.

[WayneKelly]

I consider one of the people who told me this to be the finest craftsman I've ever met. I trust his opinion more than anyone else in the world. I trust him to tell me the truth with no bullshit or personal bias. I trust him with my life. He's my dad.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

It may be hogwash, but it is a standard and a common ground for comparisons.

No, but I'd buy a glue that is suitable for intermittant watering because that is the conditions I'm using it in. If it was to be submersed, I'd either use epoxy or put in into hip wader for protection.

Franklin? They are taking advantage of an already mis-named standard. I have no idea who came up with the terms and conditions, but I'd blame the ANSI people and the industry representatives that puts them together. I have no doubt that they meet the standard.

OK, does it work or does it not? Wood Magazine did not test according to any published standard. What they told me was it is not so good when submerged for 24 hours. OK, I'll buy that, but will it work for my lawn furniture subjected to rain at times? They don't tell me that. They gave me Bull and Hogwash, not facts that I can use to make a decision for my particular use.

Had they done test with 1 hour, 2 hour, 3 hour, etc. exposure, I'd take it for what it is worth. They skipped the meaningful data. That is questionable as to bias, for sure, not at all fair. Nothing wrong with a torture test, but let us know at what point it failed, not what point beyond normal use it was not good. Ed

[NoOne N Particular]

Don't you mean Ford PINTO? LOL

[patrick conroy]

I'm in... Do you have the email for Mr. Stone?

[patrick conroy]

Never mind - I see you posted it already...

[Dave Hinz]

The bigger question, I think, is this - if Titebond is saying that Wood magazine was using it wrong to get the bad results (right? I think that's the point), my question is - how touchy is this product that an experienced woodworking outfit such as Wood magazine can use it wrong, such that it's not going to perform right? If the process for using it is substantionally different than other glues, maybe they need to do some more R&D before releasing the product.

[Dave Hinz]

No, the Firestone tires on the Ford Explorer, in combination, caused more than a few major accidents. The odd thing is that those tires are fine on other vehicles, and other tires are fine on that vehicle, or so we've been asked to believe.

[Todd Fatheree]

experienced

substantionally

Apparently, Wood's problem is in reading the directions. The bottle says it is not mean for continuous submersion. Is there something unclear about that?

todd

[Dave Hinz]

How does "waterproof" reconcile with "not meant for continuous submersion", exactly? Sounds like word-games to me, to make a product seem to be able to do something it can't.

[WayneKelly]

Does it matter? The important issue is that a cheaper, and even according to Franklin, an inferior product TiteBond II work better under those extreme conditions than the heavily advertized 'superior' TiteBond III. It's my opinion that Franklin might have released TB III to the market before the product was ready and they got CAUGHT by WOOD magazine.

[Leon]

submersion",

Uh Huh... and,,,, most the other glues have the same stipulations and still performed better in this particular test TB3.

[Todd Fatheree]

submersion",

Why don't you read the relavant ASTM/ANSI standard and get back to me? This appears to be a case where the common-sense understanding and the technical meaning of a word in a specific context are at odds. Most likely, you should take your complaint to the relavant standards subcommittee rather than berating Franklin for following a standard which they may or may not have had a hand in writing.

todd