Copy Cats and Market Shift

Both are inferior to the original Shave King in purpose. The Shave King had smaller grooves to hold water via tension after rinsing to bring water to the face and hydrate the lather. With large groves its just deco. YMMV and all that

I'd say 90% of the reviews of the GSK find it to be too mild, especially compared to the Yaqi/RR. I never noticed hydration being an issue as a general rule and figure most of the appeal is the look and not its autolube gimmickry. I see very few actually using the GSK as a regular shaver.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

YMMV but that was the purpose Joseph Mellon had is designing the razor. You can find it under Patent US2374612A. The relevant portion is

April 24, 1945. .1. M. MELLON SAFETY RAZOR Filed Jan. 29, 1944 INVENYTOR. JOSEPH M. MELLO/V Patented Apr. 24, 1945 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE SAFETY RAZOR Joseph M. Mellon, Detroit, Mich. Application January'29', 1944, Serial No. 520,333

3 Claims. My invention relates to a new and useful improvement in a safety razor, and has for its object the provision of a safety razor so constructed and arranged that when dipped in water or placed in a running stream of water, it will retain a quantity of the water and release the same when the cutting edge of the blade is placed against the face.

It is another object of the invention to provide a safety razor so constructed and arranged that it may moisten the lather immediately preceding the cutting blade as it is drawn over the face.

Another object of the invention is the provision of a safety razor having a back plate provided at its opposite edges with transversely directed longitudinally spaced apart slots of such a width as to provide water receiving and retaining spaces so thatas the razor is drawn over the face in the shaving'operation, the water retained in the slots will flow onto the face and serve moistening purposes.

Understood.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

To be fair the Yaqi is not a clone or even a copy of the PAA DOC. It is an "inspired by" which works pretty well, but its configuration and geometry are quite different.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Both are inferior to the original Shave King in purpose. The Shave King had smaller grooves to hold water via tension after rinsing to bring water to the face and hydrate the lather. With large groves its just deco. YMMV and all that

I disagree that the top oc in the DOC is deco. It actually does capture water and soap and leaves trails on the face, which make it one of the best buffing razors out there. But again, YMMV!

As i have tried to point out over and over again, my beef was with people or companies within our own niche copying and underpricing, Simple as that. I don't think my higher priced homage to Clubman is making them reconsider scent production. It is also different, a variation as is done in jazz. The formula is really different...thus making it not a clone. What I was speaking of was how I was now rethinking doing reboots and how I felt about that.

I also use similar names as part of the homage and to be transparent, as I do on my sales page. Some brands do grab other concepts and ideas and never give a tip of the hat, I do out of respect and admiration.

"complaining about something that "hurts" your business when one is doing the EXACT same thing just with a different product because it makes a vendor look like a hypocrite." <====== It's not the EXACT same thing that I was talking about nor what upset me.

Nothing hypocritical about what I said. I was bothered by unknown (chinese/russian) manufacturers coming into a small niche and doing this. I thought I was really clear on that. To compare this to dupes and reboots one does as a small artisan in a small niche outside of the mainstream one that the big boys play in is just a different scenario. This upsets me not only for myself but also for others and others to come. The conversation I thought I was having was about razor clones and that is what I spoke to.

"Did Clubman not ever do heavy lifting?  Did Barbasol not ever do heavy lifting? " <====== This is not at all what I'm talking about. These companies are huge conglomerates outside our niche and VERY well established.

I was also stating I have not built a business on dupes but it seems like you fellas missed the point too, that's fine. Lastly, I pointed out that I accepted where the niche was going. I was just sharing an opinion and my experience, there really is no right answer or wrong, I just don't think it's kosher to call or imply someone is a hypocritical apple when you have been talking about oranges. Sorry for the confusion.

I can get you are the producer so you have your own point of view and your beef etc.

But i also have some remarks.
First of, for a customer there is no such a thing as underpricing. Underpricing means somebody offer something below a standard price. For me it means cheaper. Does he do it at his own cost with a loss willingly to push you out or are his costy way cheaper than your or is your price actually OVERpriced so he is satisfied with a smaller profit margin I shouldn't care. Also, one can enter the market but even charhing more than the current price. Maybe if he uses better ingredients or smth. I just love the fact we have 10 green irish tweed dupes/inspiredby scents. I have the option to compare them to choose what suits me best and so on

Second, don't agree on the Clubman thing. It's based on it and it's name is similiar thus wanting to be related to the original. Hommage or just good marketing? Who knows. Fake Nikes also have a Nikkei name on them, inspired by shoes Anyway, it's a inspired by scent, meaning somewhat based on the original. Is it cheaper or more expensive than the original is totally not important.
And who knows what do the guys at Clubman think. Maybe they are waiting for you to become a bigger company and then buy you off. You did enter their market. A part of it at least. Maybe unilever buys PAA like they did with dollar shave club.

Third, why does it matter who comes into the niche? Maybe guys at the Tabac factory are pissed off at all of you artisans that steal their market. Which you did. And that's legit. Maybe Merkur people are not happy with maggard razors.... Small guys, big guys, totally irrelevant. Why is it one thing when there are 10 new artisans on the market but 1 big chinese conglomerate is another? Everybody is competing in that same niche. Maybe if you start making womens face creams tomorrow you enter a new niche and there is a hanfull of small producers and suddendly you're the big guy entering the niche marketand you can offer cheaper products cause of having larger scale production. What than?

As soon as a market evolve and grows into something bigger its natural bigger players will step in. A lot of mainstream markets were niche markets once. Big guys became big guys by diversification and growing, they were probably small when they started just like you did. So, can't see why is it a totally different scenario.

The above also refers to Clubman/Barbasol being big conglomerates-totally irrelevant. They did heavy lifting to become the conglomerate, they still do r&d, they can still complain about the smaller or bigger guys taking pieces of their market. If they assess entering into wetshaving market is profitable, why can't they. Or why shouldn't they. If it means by creating a new soap, duping famous fragrances or even buying i.e. Razorock. They have every right to enter the market just like you did.

All the best to your business, but I am all for more guys, big or small coming into this. It motivates the existing artisans to become better and what the OP said - going premium, offers more choice and lower prices.

I understand what u are saying and appreciate your perspective! From mine, as an artisan and a consumer myself who also likes a good deal, I still would like to see new and interesting things rather than everything becoming the same, and that may be just me. A deal is great but sometimes you may not know what you're missing if that's all your looking for. As I mentioned, I am less inclined to risk rebooting anymore obscure relics due to this trend...so some will miss out on what will never come to be. Shave On!

My view is a probably a little different. I believe, most every product or service is "inspired by". Very few things are truly invented, it's all part of an evolution.

A smart business analyst told me a long time ago, the key to business success is being able to see a void and fill that void. Whether the void is a tweak is design/formula, cost, packaging, marketing, etc. If you are successful, you've filled a void in the market.

Sometimes the void is easy, like with the EJ DE89 head razor. They were selling an un-patentable design, that is cheap and easy to cast for 10x the cost of manufacturing. So someone copied it, tweaked it, sold it for $15 instead of $45 and their market was instantly toast. Years ago we use to sell thousands of dollars of EJ gear a month, now the number is slowly moving toward nil. EJ rested on their laurels and lost their edge.

Sometimes the void is difficult, like with Rolex. They make a super lux product, that is relatively easy to copy and sell for 1/50th the price, but copying the branding/cache/market/feeling is damn near impossible even with billions of dollars at your disposal. Rolext sells 800-900K watches a year, even thought there are 10x the amount of branded copies on the street. The reality that they know is... anyone that truly wants a Rolex, won't even wear a copy if it's free, they are not buy $15,000 worth of watch, they are buying $15,000 worth of "feeling."

If you try to copy, you still need a gateway (a void) to be successful and you need to execute brilliantly. If you are a company that gets copied and in a short period of time and your niche dissolved, you left the door wide open to that. A smart business can make sure the voids are small to nil using various techniques and knowledge (ie. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Costco, etc). Two businesses tried to copy two of our razors, the Mamba and the Stealth, both failed miserably because they did not understand about voids. Watching the process was enjoyable to me because I found it very amusing. I got hundreds of emails asking if I was mad... hell no! I actually thought it was a compliment and it was awesome watching them give it a go. One of the owners actually called me on the telephone and asked me (after a lot of conversation) why I wasn't upset, I told him, because it only makes me stronger in the long-run.

I remember all the rave about the Plisson Synthetic brush, then I did some research and quickly figured out what companies made the fibers and how much they cost. I said to my partner "that void will shut in 12 months or less."

Business is so much fun, and it's fun because of smart capitalistic competition. I love running businesses because it's like a chess match but with thousands of more variables. We are born and then one day we die... let us live and enjoy the process. Believe me, innovation will not die because of copy cats, where there is a void, there is a smart capitalist ready to fill it, what's far more important is having a society that welcomes and embraces capitalism.

Both are inferior to the original Shave King in purpose. The Shave King had smaller grooves to hold water via tension after rinsing to bring water to the face and hydrate the lather. With large groves its just deco. YMMV and all that

I'd say 90% of the reviews of the GSK find it to be too mild, especially compared to the Yaqi/RR. I never noticed hydration being an issue as a general rule and figure most of the appeal is the look and not its autolube gimmickry. I see very few actually using the GSK as a regular shaver.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

YMMV but that was the purpose Joseph Mellon had is designing the razor. You can find it under Patent US2374612A. The relevant portion is

April 24, 1945. .1. M. MELLON SAFETY RAZOR Filed Jan. 29, 1944 INVENYTOR. JOSEPH M. MELLO/V Patented Apr. 24, 1945 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE SAFETY RAZOR Joseph M. Mellon, Detroit, Mich. Application January'29', 1944, Serial No. 520,333

3 Claims. My invention relates to a new and useful improvement in a safety razor, and has for its object the provision of a safety razor so constructed and arranged that when dipped in water or placed in a running stream of water, it will retain a quantity of the water and release the same when the cutting edge of the blade is placed against the face.

It is another object of the invention to provide a safety razor so constructed and arranged that it may moisten the lather immediately preceding the cutting blade as it is drawn over the face.

Another object of the invention is the provision of a safety razor having a back plate provided at its opposite edges with transversely directed longitudinally spaced apart slots of such a width as to provide water receiving and retaining spaces so thatas the razor is drawn over the face in the shaving'operation, the water retained in the slots will flow onto the face and serve moistening purposes.

He succeeded in making a very inefficient razor compared to the newer versions (Yes I had one and sold it). YMMV and all that.....

BTW my only comparisons to the Grand Shave King are the original PAA DOC and the later Aluminus version. I haven't tried a RR SLOC or a Yaqi.

BTW my only comparisons to the Grand Shave King are the original PAA DOC and the later Aluminus version. I haven't tried a RR SLOC or a Yaqi.

I haven’t tried the Shave King or the original PAA DOC. The PAA DOC Evo in stainless, however, is one of my favorite razors. I’ve used it every day for the last 11 days, and will use it again tomorrow. Sure, one can argue it’s “derivative,” but one can argue that all modern three-piece DEs are “derivatives.” I don’t think I need to use the Shave King or original DOC to know that the Evo is a much different razor.

My view is a probably a little different. I believe, most every product or service is "inspired by". Very few things are truly invented, it's all part of an evolution.

A smart business analyst told me a long time ago, the key to business success is being able to see a void and fill that void. Whether the void is a tweak is design/formula, cost, packaging, marketing, etc. If you are successful, you've filled a void in the market.

Sometimes the void is easy, like with the EJ DE89 head razor. They were selling an un-patentable design, that is cheap and easy to cast for 10x the cost of manufacturing. So someone copied it, tweaked it, sold it for $15 instead of $45 and their market was instantly toast. Years ago we use to sell thousands of dollars of EJ gear a month, now the number is slowly moving toward nil. EJ rested on their laurels and lost their edge.

Sometimes the void is difficult, like with Rolex. They make a super lux product, that is relatively easy to copy and sell for 1/50th the price, but copying the branding/cache/market/feeling is damn near impossible even with billions of dollars at your disposal. Rolext sells 800-900K watches a year, even thought there are 10x the amount of branded copies on the street. The reality that they know is... anyone that truly wants a Rolex, won't even wear a copy if it's free, they are not buy $15,000 worth of watch, they are buying $15,000 worth of "feeling."

If you try to copy, you still need a gateway (a void) to be successful and you need to execute brilliantly. If you are a company that gets copied and in a short period of time and your niche dissolved, you left the door wide open to that. A smart business can make sure the voids are small to nil using various techniques and knowledge (ie. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Costco, etc). Two businesses tried to copy two of our razors, the Mamba and the Stealth, both failed miserably because they did not understand about voids. Watching the process was enjoyable to me because I found it very amusing. I got hundreds of emails asking if I was mad... hell no! I actually thought it was a compliment and it was awesome watching them give it a go. One of the owners actually called me on the telephone and asked me (after a lot of conversation) why I wasn't upset, I told him, because it only makes me stronger in the long-run.

I remember all the rave about the Plisson Synthetic brush, then I did some research and quickly figured out what companies made the fibers and how much they cost. I said to my partner "that void will shut in 12 months or less."

Business is so much fun, and it's fun because of smart capitalistic competition. I love running businesses because it's like a chess match but with thousands of more variables. We are born and then one day we die... let us live and enjoy the process. Believe me, innovation will not die because of copy cats, where there is a void, there is a smart capitalist ready to fill it, what's far more important is having a society that welcomes and embraces capitalism.

Greatly said. Basically you said everything i wanted to but i wrote two novels haha.
It's great to see a entrepreneur who thinks like this. Fair and objective, not complaining about competition.
Wish you great success in future businesses.




Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

This was an interesting reread.

I just entered this DE world a few months ago and purchased strictly vintage Gillettes. Participating in forums such as this wet my appetite to explore some modern razors. One thing led to another and and all of a sudden I was paying 100 dollars for a Rockwell 6S. I suspect once caught there is no escape. These premium razors are addictive (still keeping a few of the vintage Gillettes).