The yarn gets juicier

What with the constant checking for real news updates recently, I didn’t think to check, so I’m not certain how recently the next part of the Harris yarn was posted.

The new material: photographs used to advertise the forthcoming (but didn’t) Hebridean-themed yarns from HTTL featured Gilpin designs, but not the Hebridean-themed yarn, since it wasn’t available yet; ditto for the photographs used on the page announcing the Rowan venture (which explains why one might have considered the Gilpin designs kinda dated?).

Of more interest to the meddling knitter is the “obscene, abusive and threatening” fax of last month…

This entry was posted in chronicles, themes. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The yarn gets juicier

  1. Juno says:

    I noticed today that the Rowan Harris yarns have been re-named Rowan Scottish Tweed for this season.

  2. dyana says:

    After working through ms.’s highly derisive writing, I’m finding it hard to believe a damn word she says. She’s offering a whole heck of a lot of allegations and “facts” with out backing them up with proof.

  3. j. says:

    Quite possibly. Of the information that can be independently corroborated, we’ve got:

    • - another company is in competition with her
    • - it has a different corporate structure than whatever it is she’s running
    • - there appears to have been replication of the content of a customer service page of her website (defined as an “entire section” of her website)

    It’s almost as if she was just waiting for something like the HTA vs. HTTL lawsuit as an invitation to air her grievances. Or maybe HTA wound her up and let her go as part of its own little public relations war, without getting its own hands dirty. Who knows.

  4. Lola says:

    Frankly, I’m having a really hard time following this saga. I can’t figure out what is this person behind the referenced website so upset about. As for the fax . . . we have only her word that it was “obscene, abusive and threatening” – we don’t know exactly what did the fax say that earned this description. Am I right to be confused about all this?