Why is it . . .

[p_mcmanis]

We should petition the accounting dept. at Gerber to do a sprint run of some high quality folders once a year and sell them on the exchange in order to uphold their proud past, and for basic nostalgia. Maybe they could hire someone as a consultant contract out some Seki production house . Hell if they produced the Hinderer copy with Ti and M4 it might relieve the market and I could get an XM-18.

Im sure Bill Harsey could design them something really high quality if they wanted to make it. He has worked with them before.

 

[jep1170]

am i wrong for buying a Cold Steel GI Tanto for $20.00? When all i wanted was a sharpened pry-bar.

 

[jep1170]

Best $20 ive spent on a knife. i love it

 

[jonnymac44]

I have a friend that owns a knife store, and he tells me that in the knife world the $50 mark is some magical mystical mark that they try to hit. He sells a tremendous amount of knives to landscapers looking for a cheap knife to cut thru burlap, construction guys looking for beaters to use on the job every day, and kids. He carries a fair amount of high end stuff, but sells a lot of the lower end knives.

I have been in the store for long stretches and see the buyers - most are not knife enthusiasts like the people on this forum, and are not coming into the store with extensive knowledge. There are also a good amount of girlfriends and wives looking for presents (birthday, Fathers Day, etc.) for their significant others, and I hear them give the only criteria as "I don't want to spend more than xxx$$".

I think its all about market share. I will also say that the flea market guys do a brisk business - I am truly amazed at the low quality stuff they sell, and the people who buy it.

I have a friend who works in the security / armored car business who carries a flea market POS every day and loves it. He has no idea why I am so picky about my knives.

I guess in order to hit the $50 price point the makers have to compromise - quality, materials, craftsmanship.

I know it's a bit late, but this was a very good post.:thumbup: Excellent knowledge of how the knife world turns.

Jonny

 

[blackfeetmageet]

I was not talking about economic efficiency in sales, but our ineficient use of resouces as it relates to economic incentives (ie. to produce quality products which will last rather than become garbage).

Sorry if my examples were a little confusing. The stories about B&D and Gibson came from my Principals of Marketing class and a book by authors Armstrong and Kotler.

I mentioned economics only to hint at the incentives for companies to produce cheap knives or products. Economic incentives in this case push companies into market segments wich generaly thrive on misinformation and hype and create "weak" products.

This ultimately leads to a person buing a "Wizard of Oz Knife" instead of a nice laminated MORA at the same price, so the incentive is to cash in on these dudes buying junk knives rather than try to increase demand for quality knives (through marketing).

 

[p_mcmanis]

I was not talking about economic efficiency in sales, but our ineficient use of resouces as it relates to economic incentives (ie. to produce quality products which will last rather than become garbage).

Its hard to even talk to this, because there is so much wrong with it that its essentialy nonsensical. Your underlying suggestion, ie that people are taking advantage of uniformed consumers, is true. If anything, the allocation of money is perfectly efficient because these companies are reallocating resources from idiots to those who make things. It is efficient to make junk and take the money, it is inefficient to make quality product because you wont sell as much or at as high a profit, leaving money in the market. Economic incentives cannot be distributed or used, they simply exist because of the nature and makeup of the market.

Converting potential sales into paying customers is completely unrelated to the allocation of resources or the most efficient means to make money. One is a marketing focus, and the other is in fact economic in focus, and you suggested that the marketing was more fitting and then now suggest that the economic viewpoint is the right one.

Like I said economics is poorly equipped to talk about a market like knives because knife pricing structure is based much more on human psychology than the actual market itself.

Sorry if my examples were a little confusing. The stories about B&D and Gibson came from my Principals of Marketing class and a book by authors Armstrong and Kotler.

No, I understood your example. Im saying its wrong. The last marketing class I took had a book that was terrible, full of innacuracies and blatantly made up stories, I wouldnt be supprised if your authors did the exact samething or are misrepresenting the story somehow.

I mentioned economics only to hint at the incentives for companies to produce cheap knives or products. Economic incentives in this case push companies into market segments wich generaly thrive on misinformation and hype and create "weak" products.

This is a complete contradiction to what you actually said earlier. It probably doesnt contradict what you meant to say, but you tried to use vocabulary that you dont have a strong enough grip on and it got out of control.

This ultimately leads to a person buing a "Wizard of Oz Knife" instead of a nice laminated MORA at the same price, so the incentive is to cash in on these dudes buying junk knives rather than try to increase demand for quality knives (through marketing).

I cant argue with that.

It took me a long time to figure your post out because it was poorly worded, verbose, and contradictory. This isnt a personal attack, but if you continue to post like this I wont respond since I feel like Im wasting my time having to go back and read all your posts and then stare at what youve written because it doesnt make any sense.

your other posts were fine, you should have stuck to that.

 

[Toyz]

Thanks for the kudos Jonnymac44 - much appreciated.

Isn't it a RUSH when you find a knife under the $50 mark that turns out to be a good one? Buck Vantage, Buck 110, Spyderco Tenacious and many, many more? If all knives were built to the best of tolerances using the best material available for the pricepoint - I would be out of a hobby!!!

Most of the fun for me is the research, shopping and fondling.

 

[lbw]

^^Well said.

I think in most cases its not hard for a decent knife to be brought to market fo a decent price. Perhaps the big production guys have us where they want us...Here we are forking out $100+ for what is sub-par and what would have been considered crapola 15 years ago. However, my Cold Steel Bushman is the toughest SOB I have ever owned (Ugly too!) and if I chip the edge while using it, all I do is giggle. Cheap is OK as long as you get what you pay for.

 

[wally@ferguson]

It's all about bringing brand name recognition to the masses. Look at Rockport shoes and countless other brands.

 

[p_mcmanis]

^^Well said.

I think in most cases its not hard for a decent knife to be brought to market fo a decent price. Perhaps the big production guys have us where they want us...Here we are forking out $100+ for what is sub-par and what would have been considered crapola 15 years ago. However, my Cold Steel Bushman is the toughest SOB I have ever owned (Ugly too!) and if I chip the edge while using it, all I do is giggle. Cheap is OK as long as you get what you pay for.

15 years ago was 1994. Production quality started going down with the baby boom and their greedy ass generation D: They want it and they want it cheap, look at the recent california initiative voting lol.

So while lots and lots of people lament the loss of quality in manufacture (which is only true in cheap things, because in good things have better tolerances, better materials and better fit and finish) 99% of them still buy cheap crap in everything but their area of interest.

Additionally, I think people from 1994 would be rather impressed with our 100+ dollar folders. Some of our newer steels like zdp189 and s90v are pretty damn impressive.