-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is $300 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
minimum advertised price
- Thread starter gester
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 3, 1999
- Messages
- 2,052
This is my take on it, Sal would be the person to answer this.
In the competitive marketplace of the 90's (read that internet commerce) price wars tend to break out between competitors. This can be good for consumers but bad for companies, and possibly bad for collectors in the long run. With the minimum advertised price people have to stay within a certain range (above the MARP but probably below the MSRP) in order to maintain dealer status with a company. Victorinox (among others) have done this for years. This does not stop people from selling the knives for whatever they want, but prohibits a devaluation of the Spyderco product and name in advertising. If people got used to seeing Delicas for sale for $25 dollars they might start thinking that it is a cheap knife and not worth any more than that. This would put official dealers in a difficult position to compete with people that buy from wholesalers. The reason that most sports cars cost more than a sedan is not so much the technology or quality but the perception that one is buying a better car than the neighbors. (I know, the components are somewhat better, but not usually enough to justify the price increase, its just an example). What I'm trying to say is that the advertised price of something effects the consumers perception of quality (not that Spyderco doesn't have high quality products).
I may be way off base with this, but that is the way I understand it. I'm interested to hear what Sal has to say about this. I'm sure everyone will let me know if I am wrong.
I've got to go get ready for the trivia contest!
------------------
Paul
Keep Em Sharp
In the competitive marketplace of the 90's (read that internet commerce) price wars tend to break out between competitors. This can be good for consumers but bad for companies, and possibly bad for collectors in the long run. With the minimum advertised price people have to stay within a certain range (above the MARP but probably below the MSRP) in order to maintain dealer status with a company. Victorinox (among others) have done this for years. This does not stop people from selling the knives for whatever they want, but prohibits a devaluation of the Spyderco product and name in advertising. If people got used to seeing Delicas for sale for $25 dollars they might start thinking that it is a cheap knife and not worth any more than that. This would put official dealers in a difficult position to compete with people that buy from wholesalers. The reason that most sports cars cost more than a sedan is not so much the technology or quality but the perception that one is buying a better car than the neighbors. (I know, the components are somewhat better, but not usually enough to justify the price increase, its just an example). What I'm trying to say is that the advertised price of something effects the consumers perception of quality (not that Spyderco doesn't have high quality products).
I may be way off base with this, but that is the way I understand it. I'm interested to hear what Sal has to say about this. I'm sure everyone will let me know if I am wrong.
I've got to go get ready for the trivia contest!
------------------
Paul
Keep Em Sharp
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 883
This topic came up a few months ago, and if the search function is functioning, you can read the old thread. Compelling reading. At the time it was pretty controversial, and Sal Glesser had to come to BladeForums to explain the policy. I think that's what got him involved here in the first place. I don't know much about marketing, or price strategy, but I am inclined to trust Sal when he assures us that Spyderco's price policy is neither stupid nor sinister. But "who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men!"
Only Mike Turber really knows for sure.
David Rock
Only Mike Turber really knows for sure.
David Rock
- Joined
- Jan 4, 1999
- Messages
- 3,000
Since Gester quoted from my web site, I suppose I should respond.
The purpose of a minimum advertised price policy is to protect dealers from each other, to "control" discounting and to help bolster dealer margins. That's its purpose. It may not be what you want to hear but that's the basis of it. The policy is not intended to control the price at which products are sold, only the price at which they are advertised, incidentally. That's an important distinction.
The problem in the knife industry is that manufacturers like Spyderco don't have really tight control on distribution since the products are sold through distributors. This means that they can't really enforce the policy without changing the distribution channel and that makes this policy pretty much voluntary on the part of the dealers.
I support the policy, not because I need margin protection but because I feel the manufacturer should be able market products the way he wishes. I think it's appropriate to comply with manufacturer's policies. It makes it impossible for a manufacturer to plan and implement those plans if nobody cooperates. Obviously all dealers don't comply with this policy. On the internet few of them do.
Incidentally, complying with the policy has really hurt our Spyderco sales. Our site is designed to be self service and most potential Spyderco customers balk at the MAAP pricing and don't e-mail to ask us to meet a price. They just move on. Of course, we're willing to price compete with other dealers if we're given a chance. We just need to do it via e-mail or telephone. So, as a result, we sell very few Spyderco products compared to other popular cutlery brands for which we have more competitive internet pricing.
I understand what Spyderco is trying to do and, you must understand, internet dealers are the "problem" policies like this are trying to deal with. Basically I'm trying not to be a part of the problem even if it hurts our sales. The web site is producing well overall and will be successful. I'm not worried about that.
So there's an unofficial explanation of the meaning of the statement you cited from the Knife Outlet Spyderco pricing and ordering page. If you want an official explanation you'll need to look elsewhere. I can only give you impressions from my perspective. This type of policy is growing in popularity among knife manufacturers, though. It's quite common in other industries in which our company operates. Take care.
------------------
Fred
Knife Outlet
www.knifeoutlet.com
The purpose of a minimum advertised price policy is to protect dealers from each other, to "control" discounting and to help bolster dealer margins. That's its purpose. It may not be what you want to hear but that's the basis of it. The policy is not intended to control the price at which products are sold, only the price at which they are advertised, incidentally. That's an important distinction.
The problem in the knife industry is that manufacturers like Spyderco don't have really tight control on distribution since the products are sold through distributors. This means that they can't really enforce the policy without changing the distribution channel and that makes this policy pretty much voluntary on the part of the dealers.
I support the policy, not because I need margin protection but because I feel the manufacturer should be able market products the way he wishes. I think it's appropriate to comply with manufacturer's policies. It makes it impossible for a manufacturer to plan and implement those plans if nobody cooperates. Obviously all dealers don't comply with this policy. On the internet few of them do.
Incidentally, complying with the policy has really hurt our Spyderco sales. Our site is designed to be self service and most potential Spyderco customers balk at the MAAP pricing and don't e-mail to ask us to meet a price. They just move on. Of course, we're willing to price compete with other dealers if we're given a chance. We just need to do it via e-mail or telephone. So, as a result, we sell very few Spyderco products compared to other popular cutlery brands for which we have more competitive internet pricing.
I understand what Spyderco is trying to do and, you must understand, internet dealers are the "problem" policies like this are trying to deal with. Basically I'm trying not to be a part of the problem even if it hurts our sales. The web site is producing well overall and will be successful. I'm not worried about that.
So there's an unofficial explanation of the meaning of the statement you cited from the Knife Outlet Spyderco pricing and ordering page. If you want an official explanation you'll need to look elsewhere. I can only give you impressions from my perspective. This type of policy is growing in popularity among knife manufacturers, though. It's quite common in other industries in which our company operates. Take care.
------------------
Fred
Knife Outlet
www.knifeoutlet.com
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 855
Just for another point of view-every dealer I've e-mailed a request for prices has failed to respond. I never bothered to try any of them again for a second time. I figured if they can't respond the first time- oh well!
Mike K.
Well, now I'm sitting at the computer trying to type and wipe the egg off my face at the same time. Just found a program called "Windows Messaging" which contained hundreds of e-mails including the responses from the dealers.
Man, what a maroon, what a jamoke. Doh!
PS: Sorry Aaron.
[This message has been edited by Hammer (edited 19 April 1999).]
Mike K.
Well, now I'm sitting at the computer trying to type and wipe the egg off my face at the same time. Just found a program called "Windows Messaging" which contained hundreds of e-mails including the responses from the dealers.
Man, what a maroon, what a jamoke. Doh!
PS: Sorry Aaron.
[This message has been edited by Hammer (edited 19 April 1999).]