Originally Posted by
Trakhak
Yet many companies depend crucially on marketing the exclusivity of their products. A New Yorker article on the creative marketing approaches used in the vodka industry (where, as the writer pointed out, the marketing had to be creative, because all vodkas taste pretty much the same) included this anecdote:
The writer was walking through an airport with the head of an advertising firm that had just landed the Absolut account when they happened on a very heavy guy wearing a too-small Absolut T-shirt. The advertising exec whipped out his wallet and bought the T-shirt on the spot for fifty bucks, explaining that he collects them.
He told the writer that the first thing he was going to do was eliminate sales of all such hoi polloi-level branding products.
I wouldn't doubt it.
I personally know of several small makers of hand-made cookware of top quality. The supply is limited, so they instantly sell out on items, to the point that some have a lottery, winners get to buy. The stuff is great quality, but hard to buy also inflates the price. Just like Hermes Birken bags.
On the other hand, the diamond industry has tried for nearly a hundred years to convince consumers that diamonds are rare, and a good investment, both of which are untrue. There are massive amounts of diamonds in storage, bought up quickly by the diamond cartel to maintain prices. Bought at retail prices, you would have a difficult time selling that diamond to any dealer at 10% of the price you paid the dealer who sold the diamond to you. Plus there are now artificial diamonds that are plentiful.
Titanium bikes used to be exotic, now not. Carbon fiber composite bikes used to be exotic, now not.
The difference in the above? The cookware is actually handmade, each piece different. Hand-hammer-forged blue steel skillets.
Everything else can be mass-produced, and prices fall as more makers enter the market. Unless the original maker prices the product from the start, at a price that will be competitive, 5 years down the road. That's called establishing a protective moat in pricing. Pricing it from the start, as high as possible for most profit, "premium pricing", means competitors can easily undercut that price and still be profitable.
My perception is that people started leaving Campag when Shimano came out with Dura-Ace. (right/wrong?) If Campag were to again sell beautiful designs, and it was successful, it wouldn't be long before Shimano offered the same. So now, I'm not sure that Campagnolo can survive with only premium, up-market products. Phil Wood is still in business selling a premium product, but they are really, really small, my perception is, run by a handful of people.
So I dunno the answer. I think at the very least, Campag should be willing to supply high-quality bike makers.