Come on Alex, your logic is better than this...
a) When you buy a kite... you look at its price and performance proposition compared to the alternatives... nothing more nothing less...
Though the kite was made in China... the fact I bought it doesn't mean I am sponsoring the Chinese government human rights abuse...
b) The amount of money you are talking about is $0.02 per kite... let's say Best sells 10k kites, $200 variable cost per kite, implies your subsidy to Fo is 2 pennies.
Hehe, yes sure I know what you mean, and I am not trying to neither take Fo's kites away, nor am I trying to indicate that FO is not worth (my) 2 pennies...but I do think that an evaluation of a product from a company includes more than price and performance. There are a lot of facets to companies and the evaluation of their products, as the moment you ride a kite that has a big company logo on it, you in effect becomes a huge billboard and a semi-representative of that company...whether you want it or not...you could have evaluated only price and performance if all kites were neutral (no identifiers).
I have just seen the developments lately and I am not sure if I like it.
In addition you kind of ask youself..why can one person get free kites whereas the next does not? I've been a faithful customer (already bought 6 kites from Best) most of them I have had to wait for an extended period of time...at some point it is enough. I guess my point came when I ordered the BFK, and 4 weeks before I receieved it I was told by the CEO of the company that the kite was obsolete....and it kind of was.. Although it flies nicely the lowend is not too good.
I can understand sponsorships when it comes to kiters that perform, or essentially are paid spokespersons for a company, this has, as I perceive it, not been the process here...(but I guess since FO likes the kites he might end up being one...so what do you say FO? Are you (paid spokesperson)?
So, I actually do think you have to evaluate a lot more than perfrormance / price.