

The Noka Chocolate scam: reselling a competitor's product after rebranding it - mcantelon
http://dallasfood.org/2006/12/noka-chocolate-part-1/

======
abhayb
The title is somewhat inaccurate/misleading. The conclusion the blog comes to
is that there are far better chocolates available for far less and that Noka
are intensionally obtuse and misleading about how their chocolate is made and
where it comes from.

Their site and other marketing material gave the impression that they oversaw
the entire chocolate making process from "bean to bar", while in actuality
they bought blocks for chocolate from what Dallas Food found to be Valrhona.
This buying of chocolate and "rebranding" it is commonplace and accepted. What
is not accepted or acceptable is concealing the source of the chocolate and
misleading potential buyers.

The real issue (I wouldn't call it a scam) is that Noka doesn't seem to add
any value while marking up the chocolate massively. And while being evasive
about the chocolate's provenance. Once again, reselling and "rebranding"
chocolate is no different from the OEM-Brand Company relationship and is not
an issue.

------
gus_massa
There is a link to the second (and 3 .. 10) part at the bottom of the page.
It's difficult to see because its color is light grey.

~~~
e1ven
Wow! Thank you! I was very confused how to read the rest of the story, noted
the date, and realized it HAD to be finished, and was about to google for each
section..

Very helpful, thank you.

------
Evbn
How does reselling someone's product make them a "competitor"?

In the world of luxury chocolate, price is the main feature. If it were lower
priced, customers would be less satisfied.

