Psvane Teflon capacitors real or fakes?

With all due respect, Rachel (I understand you may simply be the messenger here), I feel compelled to remove some of the wool from the “official response” you posted by Psvane.

>>> Psvane’s Polyester/Mylar capacitor was marketed with “Teflon film” prominently used in its description- not “Teflon insulation”, or “Teflon leads”. This was used on the official Psvane website, Grant’s website, eBay ads, as well as the Alibaba listing by K&D Industrial. None of this marketing material referred to ‘Polyester’, ‘Mylar’, or ‘BoPET’. It takes a rather generous dose of hubris to put forth the explanation provided in the “official response”, IMHO.

>>> That “plastic sheet used between the conductors”, despite your response to downplay its importance, defines what a Teflon capacitor is… not the lead material's dielectric, end-fill, outer wrap, or label. It is incongruous that the insulation of a cap’s lead material would deserve such strong marketing emphasis, when it’s simply a polyester (also marketed as Mylar) dielectric cap, IMHO.

>>> Up until the last few days, Psvane was using the term “CuTF” for its online marketing, and its own website. This, despite my numerous e-mail requests made (since September, 2011) for Grant and Psvane to cease and desist using this V-Cap trademark of genuine OFHC Copper Foil and Teflon Film dielectric capacitors.

>>> I'd like to present this scenario for your consideration: If a Psvane competitor used the term “Treasure” to market its own vacuum tube line – and this competitor purported to use similar materials to Psvane’s line of tubes, would Psvane consider this an attempt to "copy", or at the very least an attempt to dilute their brand, as well as unfair attempt to harvest search engine queries for Psvane's product trademark? Or does this scenario only apply to a company who has little hope for any enforcement of trademark protection in China?

Best regards,

Chris VenHaus
V-Cap
VH Audio

All excellent points Chris.

I think it's VERY clear here what was being done and it's pretty disgusting in my opinion.

I am surprised to Parts Connexion is on radio silence for this discourse

I am not Jallen, a few years ago they were called out for selling Oyaide knockoffs as the real thing. Claimed they didn't know, said they paid a lot for them. They've been in the business too long, that doesn't really fly....

This is a sad day for audio. The quick dollar seems to trump long term market viability. One more reason for the consumer to feel duped and cynical. Kudos to Audiogon for allowing the discourse and exposure. Jallen

To answer to Chris from VH Audio:

1. The misunderstanding / error (or whatever you call it) of Teflon film or Teflon shielded leads on Psvane caps has been clarified in my previous post based on the answer I received from Psvane Audio. Whether the manufacturer calls their products Polyester cap is not up to me or you to police. You may direct your opinion to Psvane Audio directly. We simply describe a product based on information provided by manufacturer and if an error is identified, we stand up and correct it immediately.

2. I am not a technical expert and I fully respect your expertise in the industry. However, saying 'downplay' of our evaluation of the product as a whole, rather than on one specific material isn't very fair. I have no intention of downplay importance of any material used in a product - I simply stressed my opinion / preference of evaluating a product as a whole. If you don't agree with my opinion, that is perfectly fine - this industry is full of debate of what is better or what's best. I welcome such debate, but I don't welcome my statement of opinion being labelled as 'downplay', simply because your V-cap uses Teflon and you have great success with it.

3. "despite my numerous e-mail requests made (since September, 2011) for Grant and Psvane to cease and desist..."

Your above statement is simply NOT true. Your first and only email to Grant Fidelity raising trademark issue was dated Sept 20th, 2011 and I personally responded to you on the very same day, and our website removed the questioned content on the very same day. I don't know why you would say 'numerous email requests' because we have kept your email for record and there is only one of such email.

How many emails you have sent to Psvane Audio are not my business and I cannot speak on behalf of them or verify. However, please keep your public statement precise and accurate since you are pretty clear on accuracy of product information provided to public - other information should be treated exactly the same way. Your indication of sending 'numerous emails to Grant Fidelity' is damaging our public image, that's the very least to say.

I clearly recall that in Sept 2011 after receiving your email, we checked V-Cap site for 'TM' mark on CuTF and it was not to be seen then. Despite of such, we removed the wording from our site as at least industry courtesy.

4. The Psvane / Treasure scenario should be presented to Psvane Audio directly - apparently you have sent 'numerous emails' to them and wouldn't mind to send another. Grant Fidelity is a re-seller of products bearing Psvane brand; we are not their agent or representative on legal matter. Directing the case to Grant Fidelity in public will not help you to give Psvane Audio a lecture on trademark - I am not a messenger in this matter.

5. We both are in commercial business in the same industry - public forum may not be the perfect place conduct B2B communication, especially when potential trademark of a few parties is involved. If you have any further issues that you think Grant Fidelity should address, please contact me directly.

Rachel @ Grant Fidelity