JYSK LOUNGE STOLICA UBBERUP CRNA

Pros

• Stylish and attractive design: Commonly described as "beautiful," "superb," "stylish," "elegant," having a "nice design," and looking "modern." Many users find them aesthetically pleasing and suitable for various settings (gardens, terraces, balconies, living rooms). The chair''s slender structure is also praised. The oval design provides good back support. Frequently described as a "design piece." Users describe them as a design complement to their homes, even during winter.
• Comfortable: Frequently described as "comfortable," "cozy," "relaxing," and "very comfortable," with many users emphasizing the high level of comfort, even without additional cushions. The seating is frequently praised. Users report sometimes falling asleep in the chairs. Described as comfortable even for larger individuals. Comfort is frequently highlighted despite the chair''s appearance. The chair''s shape provides good back support.
• Good value for money: Frequently praised for being "cheap," "affordable," "good price," offering "good quality for the price," and representing a "bargain" when on sale. Prices mentioned range from €30 to €70 (converted from local currencies). Some users report years of satisfactory use (up to 5 years). Described as a "good price/quality ratio."
• Easy assembly: Assembly is described as "easy," "quick," and "simple," involving only screwing in the legs. The ease of assembly is highlighted as a key positive aspect. Assembly takes approximately 20 minutes for two chairs.
• Compact and easy to store: The ability to remove legs for easier storage and transport is mentioned. Chairs can be easily stored indoors during winter.

Cons

• Leg breakage: A significant recurring issue, with multiple reports of legs breaking after minimal use (even with light users, 51kg). This seems to be due to poor welds, resulting in legs being positioned too high from the ground. Uneven leg lengths are also reported. Replacement chairs also exhibited the same problem. Legs require frequent tightening.
• Poor material quality: Frequent reports of plastic parts breaking, the coating peeling, and weaving deteriorating after minimal use and exposure to the elements (rain, sun). One user described the material as "terrible." The plastic is reported to degrade after 1-2 years of sun exposure. Damaged packages upon arrival resulting in damaged chairs are also reported.
• String breakage: Several users report the strings (described as plastic "wires") breaking or weakening after minimal use. This issue is also experienced after chair replacements. Users report needing to repair broken strings frequently. Weakening of the strings is a commonly mentioned problem, sometimes attributed to winter storage. One user reported significant string deterioration after only one week of use, with a replacement chair exhibiting similar problems.
• Lack of durability: While some users report long-term use (up to 5 years, often with indoor storage), many others experience breakage or significant wear after short periods. This highlights concerns about the overall quality and sturdiness. The metal supports can cause discomfort for some users due to pressure against the back. Some users report issues even with light usage. One user suggests that the chairs may not be suitable for heavier individuals. Size inconsistencies between chairs are also reported. Chairs described as "slap" (loose) in construction. The chairs are not suitable for long periods of sitting.
• Inconsistent quality: Several reports indicate receiving damaged chairs upon delivery, emphasizing inconsistent manufacturing standards. Reports of wobbly legs and crooked chairs are mentioned. One user received a chair with worn tips on the legs, despite it being packaged as new. Chairs arrive damaged due to poor packaging.
• Leg wear: Reports indicate that the legs of the chair are prone to wear and tear.

Comments

The reviews reveal a significant discrepancy in product longevity and durability. While some users report years of satisfactory use (often with indoor storage), a substantial number experience premature failure, especially leg and string breakage. This suggests a quality control issue resulting in inconsistent product quality. Some chairs are robust, while others have fundamental structural flaws leading to rapid breakdown. The frequent breakage necessitates replacements or repairs, undermining the value proposition of an otherwise attractive and affordable product. The inconsistency in material quality further supports the idea of inconsistent manufacturing standards. The design, while aesthetically pleasing to many, may not be ideal for all users; the metal supports may cause discomfort for those with broader backs. Storing the chairs indoors during winter is suggested to prolong their lifespan. The reported problems seem to be widespread, with multiple users receiving replacement chairs that also exhibited the same issues. A strong smell from the chair is reported as a negative aspect. The chairs are described as "slap" (loose) in construction by one user.