It looks great, saves time and money on maintenance fees.

http://valleypooldemo.blogspot.com/

Now, to address our friends at Synlawn. First off, Jason is correct it is common for them to slander their competitors as some form of sleazy sales tactic. We are happy that we now get the chance to debate them in an open forum like here on the Alternative Consumer. First though, we must address some of the non truths they state:
1) No one at our company was interviewed by anyone save for our President who (shameless plug here) was interviewed on Designing Spaces and the Balancing Act which will air on their respected networks in June.
2) None of our investors or partners have ever been in the artificial football field business not that that really matters.
3) And also, if it really matters NewGrass actually has four families as primary investors not two.

Now for their silliness.

NewGrass LLC of Arizona is the company that owns the brand NewGrass and yes we sell NewGrass to a distributor network who then sells it to consumers. This is not an uncommon business model. The best example of it is PepsiCo. PepsiCo owns the brand Pepsi and owns the recipe to the syrup but they don’t bottle Pepsi nor do they sell it to the consumer. Surely Mr. Synlawn doesn’t think this is a questionable business model? I assume he just doesn’t understand the values of it like being able to support a larger independent sales and installation force or the fact that this business model actually protects the consumer better than the Synlawn business model because NewGrass does not have the large overhead costs that typically sink other companies like the first incarnation of Synlawn (yes the Synlawn of today is “Synlawn take two”).

Mr. Synlawn is correct that NewGrass LLC was incorporated in February of 2005 in Arizona but Synlawn was incorporated in the fall of 2003 which makes it only 14 months older but does age really matter here? Actually Synlawn wasn’t incorporated at all the name was/is owned by another company Universal Brand Company. So wait… when you deal with warranty claims in California do you deal with Synlawn of Southern California Inc.? or did they have to change their name because they were being sued for trademark infringement?
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-cacdce/case_no-2:2007cv03387/case_id-389339/ or do you deal with the parent company that was incorporated in Florida? Oh wait I mean Georgia because that Florida company was assumed by Crystal Turf Products in 2006. So much for the comfort of “vertical integration”.

Lets address the vertical integration model for a second shall we? Crystal Turf Products is the company that actually manufactures Synlawn and yes they are one of the bigger manufacturers in the industry and they manufacture synthetic grass for a multitude of other companies besides Synlawn. Crystal Turf Products is owned by the same family that owns Synlawn which is why they think they can make the claim of “vertical integration”. NewGrass LLC has chosen not to be vertically integrated because our experience has proven that only working with one manufacturer can lead to issues of supply. In peak seasons it is common for a manufacturer to be swamped with orders and ultimately the supply is hampered. That is what ultimately doomed “Synlawn take one”. At NewGrass we have numerous manufacturers so we can guarantee delivery of our product in 10 business days or less. You should call Synlawn and ask them for their lead time. You would be surprised at the response.

Now let’s get to the most important discussion; the product itself.

NewGrass offers four varieties of synthetic grass. Mr. Synlawn claims they have 50 varieties, although, I went to their Web site and only counted 22. Regardless, our research shows that consumers feel that excess numbers are nothing more than a confusing distraction. They just want the most realistic looking product available which we believe we offer. Face weight is also nothing more than another distraction according to our customers. The concept of face weight has significance in the carpet industry but not in the synthetic grass industry, maybe Mr. Synlawn has been to Universal Textile Technologies offices one too many times? All that face weight means is how thick is the grass? The thicker it is the less you theoretically need infill to help the blades stand up. However, NewGrass feels infill is an important part of the installation process not only for helping the blades stand up but for ballast. Without infill there is nothing holding your grass in place so you are going to have some movement. NewGrass does not offer “no infill” grasses like Synlawn does as we feel it is not a satisfactory product. According to Synlawn’s own site when they do require infill they use silica sand. NewGrass uses nickel slag for our infill as it is not a toxic substance like silica sand is, according the state of California. Mr. Synlawn suggests that slag “Doesn’t sound very environmentally friendly or healthy or safe or easy to blow off or clean!” But he is mistaken again because it actually is environmentally friendly and far more friendlier then silica sand!

The one thing that Mr. Synlawn suggests that is somewhat disturbing to us is his questioning of the NewGrass recycle pledge. He suggests that because of the cost of the recycling service, which he calculates to be $500-$1000, that our pledge is an “outrageous and dubious promise”. Well Mr. Synlawn, I think this is a good example of the difference between our two companies. At NewGrass our commitment to the environment is first and foremost, we are not greedy money hording capitalists looking to horde every dime. We recognize that it will cost us up to $1000 to recycle NewGrass but we also feel it is our duty to do so for the good of this planet. Instead of simply denouncing the idea Synlawn should “copy NewGrass” and take up a similar pledge.

And so I leave the best for last our “revolutionary backing” as Mr. Synlawn puts it. I find this the most amusing point of all as it shows that he clearly does not know what he is talking about and would rather throw around outrageous claims as if there were no consequences. Well, Mr. Synlawn, our new Envirocell backing is actually a product of Universal Textile Technologies Inc. which is a sister company of Synlawn! Obviously Synlawn does not even use their own sister companies eco-friendly solutions or he would know something about it! A pity because we feel it is a great product and maybe it’s another thing that Synlawn should copy from NewGrass.