"I find it amazing the wild personal assumptions that some contributors appear to have jumped to about me."
Well having read all that, I'm making the wild assumption that sometimes you're economical with the truth. That's based on your first post including the line "within a minute of testing one of the items namely a hat, I found it to be not what I expected. I returned the items in EXACTLY the same condition as I received them". No mention there that you'd been on a 15 minute bike ride with it. It took somebody from TN coming on here to drag that one out of you. Given that point is the crux of the matter, and that you came on here in the first place trying to get sympathy by carefully not mentioning that little fact, and trying to give the impression instead that you'd just tried it on for less than a minute, I have to wonder how much we can trust any of your side of the story - sorry! Personally I wouldn't consider a hat full of your hair to be in exactly the same condition you received it, irrespective of what condition you got it in - apparently it was obviously enough used by you for TN to reject your return.
That is the whole point you see. Whatever other claims you might think you have, once you've used something then unless it's actually faulty (which isn't the case just because it's not as warm as you wanted), you no longer have the right to return it for a refund.
"Like some of you have stated, I don’t think any of this bodes well for TN but it is their choice to continue."
On the contrary, I think most people who might come across this thread from outside are likely to think it is you who are being unreasonable, and not TN at all. However much you might protest otherwise, it is quite plain that your only reason for starting this thread (rather than carrying out any legal action in private) was to attempt to drag them through the mud and hope that some sticks. Now I'm sure you couldn't care less what I think of you, but from all the above, it would be your company I would choose not to use rather than TN.
I presume attempting to do all 214 as fast as possible (like an oversized Bob Graham round) wouldn't be in the spirit of Wainwright? Do wonder how quickly they could all be done - presumably if done in a single round it would be considerably less than the 450 miles mentioned earlier?
Just found this - I'm only an occasional OMer nowadays. I was actually out there racing - at least for a little while (my avatar is a piccy from a similar race back in 2001, when I was a regular here before Sleepmonsters existed!). Unfortunately injury and illness did for my team and we didn't make it very far round. Did end up going back to Knoydart to collect controls with your mate Craig, and I have to say that the reception we got from the locals there implied they had been very happy for the race to go through their backyard (we got a freebie boatride out which was fun). Also no sign at all that the race had ever been there apart from the controls we went to collect - didn't find a single bit of litter, and we were going over a lot of the race route. Where else could you say that after nearly 200 people passing through? If it wasn't that I'd ridden my bike from there a few days earlier I'd certainly never have guessed the parking place had been a transition area. Is swamp donkey's only gripe that he couldn't park in the usual place, as I certainly can't work out what else we disrupted in that area?
Anyway, having been abroad racing against the top guys several times, it was pretty awesome to see them come and find how hard the Scottish mountains are (though unfortunately not as hard as the UK teams found it - AFAIK this was the first time a UK teams hasn't made the top 10 at the World Champs).
I couldn't be bothered reading ALS repeating himself multiple times, so have skipped lots of this thread, and I must also declare at the start that I am sponsored by Inov-8 so obviously have a vested interest (though should also point out that we choose our sponsors on the basis of having a product we'd pay real money for). However I have also spoken with Wayne multiple times, and have had some input into the range.
Anyway, my shoe of choice is actually the Flyroc - my all time favourite running shoe. Not perfect for everything (certainly plenty of sitations where eg a Mudclaw is better), but the best all-rounder - I have used them happily in fell-running and orienteering events, and they are also really good on wet rock I find (better than Walshes IMHO). Anyway, we were actually discussing the Terroc - now these are actually very similar to the Flyroc, being based on the same last and aimed at very similar purposes. The main difference being they are a little more sturdy with a bit more cushioning. Yes the sole is different, but it's not that different, and I think Inov-8 are underselling it if you compare the ratings in that chart to those for the Flyroc. You should also bear in mind that those ratings are relative to other Inov-8 shoes, and it might just get a low rating because there's a different shoe in the range which excels in that sort of terrain. Obviously it is marketed for use on hard packed trails, but it's actually a lot more verstile than that.