Shave Soap---Stratified

Everyone that does not possess an unlimited amount of money or that isn't destined for poverty, takes all costs, including opportunity costs, into account when making purchases.  If you see a $12.00 safety razor on eBay that has a shipping fee of $25.00, how much did it cost?  Did it cost $12.00 or did it cost $37.00?   Personally, I'm going to determine whether or not I think the razor is worth $37.00 and I'm going to weigh that against what other options I have for spending that $37.00.   Assume there is another, nearly identical, razor that costs $25 and has a $5 shipping fee?  Which of the razors is cheaper the $12 one or the $25 one?  I take total cost of ownership, including opportunity cost,  into account when purchasing a tin of soap and I do the same when I purchase a car.

Let's say that someone sees a razor strop that costs $100 that he likes.  Let's also say that he makes $500/day as some sort of contract employee.  Let's also say that he can get the materials to make the strop for $25.  Not wanting to pay $100 for the strop, he decides to take 1/2 day off from work and make one just like the one for $100?  Assume he does so and succeeds. So what is the price of the strop?  Is it the $25 for the materials?  Or is the value proposition:  $250 (loss of a half-day's pay) + $25 (cost of materials) - $100 (value of the strop) = $175?   Was this person's value proposition a sound one, or a poor one? One can only make proper decisions when all costs are factored into the value equation.

As a follow up on the theory that soaps that cost more may be better than soaps that cost less which leads into a topic of " social class". Let me present this to you. In March 2014 I purchased a tub of Edwin Jagger Limes & Pomegranate in a wood bowl and paid $41. The actual soap is 2.3 ounces. This is the worst soap I have purchased as far as lathering and performance. I wrote to Edwin Jagger and complained, but said it may have been a bad batch. They were nice enough to send me a free refill which I thought was no better. Two pucks and one is no better than the other in my opinion. I think I am right when I say that many of the mail order houses are selling refills for $9. maybe to get rid of their inventory. Now you can say that tub costs $32 and the soap is only $9. What ever, $41 for 2.3 ounces is high and in my opinion this is proof that the more soap or cream costs has no relationship to the performance.

As a follow up on the theory that soaps that cost more may be better than soaps that cost less which leads into a topic of " social class".  Let me present this to you.  In March 2014 I purchased a tub of Edwin Jagger Limes  & Pomegranate in a wood bowl and paid $41.  The actual soap is 2.3 ounces.  This is the worst soap I have purchased as far as lathering and performance.  I wrote to Edwin Jagger and complained, but said it may have been a bad batch.  They were nice enough to send me a free refill which I thought was no better.  Two pucks and one is no better than the other in my opinion.  I think I am right when I say that many of the mail order houses are selling refills for $9. maybe to get rid of their inventory.  Now you can say that tub costs $32 and the soap is only $9.  What ever, $41 for 2.3 ounces is high and in my opinion this is proof that the more soap or cream costs has no relationship to the performance.

Now you're touching on the psychology of pricing of "luxury" goods. There have been plenty of studies done (mostly by marketing firms) in this field. People are likely to believe that if something is expensive it must be good and obviously better than a cheaper product. Even when a product is objectively inferior to another product like for instance European automobiles relative to American or Japanese cars, certain people will buy the inferior more expensive European cars BECAUSE they're more expensive. It differentiates them as a person who can afford such things just like having a belly in the 18th century differentiated you as a person who could afford food.

My point is (I think I have a point ) there are brands in the wet shaving world that have luxury sounding names and cater to newcomers to the field. It sounds luxurious or Olde Tyme and must be good. I assume some folks stick to the mediocre stuff and will even recommend it to others displaying confirmation bias - i.e., they bought it so it must be good otherwise they made a poor buying decision which doesn't jive with their view of themselves as a savvy person and we can't have that. Incidentally I think the nature of forums such as DFS contributes to a little more openness than we might otherwise see if we were to all meet up in person to discuss the merits of the various shaving products we've bought. We are more or less anonymous here so our egos aren't at risk so much and we are more likely to admit a poor buying decision and warn others. Although the wet shaving credo of YMMV will still have most of us trying the panned product to see if it might be different for us.

I have not tried any Edwin Jagger software, however, I am indebted to their DE-89 for a safe and enjoyable entry into the use of the DE razor and I have a very nice Edwin Jagger best badger brush which I am fond of.

Everyone that does not possess an unlimited amount of money or that isn't destined for poverty, takes all costs, including opportunity costs, into account when making purchases.  If you see a $12.00 safety razor on eBay that has a shipping fee of $25.00, how much did it cost?

True. It's just that about now, everything in the US is about free shipping. Sign up for newsletters from online shaving stores and you get free shipping coupons all the time. Buy over $49 or whatever their minimum might be, and free shipping. And the killer is Amazon prime. Not only is shipping free but in some cases same day shipping. And this does spoil the public.

This is America. Not only had shipping BETTER be free, if it isn't here in 48 hours, I want a discount. Amazon will extend your Prime membership if it does. It used to be if the pizza didn't arrive at your door in 30 minutes - free Pizza.

We live in a world of instant gratification.

Now you can say that tub costs $32 and the soap is only $9.  What ever, $41 for 2.3 ounces is high and in my opinion this is proof that the more soap or cream costs has no relationship to the performance.

Sorry, I don't buy into that.

You can buy C&S Oxford for $160 in a container or $32 for the refill. Its the exact same soap. Shove the refill in an old tupperware container and done. It's you fault if you spend $160.

You can spend $115 for the Boellis Panama Coffret, or $48 for the refill. Good luck storing all those coffrets over the rest of your life

You can spend $36 for i Colonalia Mango in a fancy bowl, or $18 for the refill.

It's your choice to spend the extra money or not.

Everyone that does not possess an unlimited amount of money or that isn't destined for poverty, takes all costs, including opportunity costs, into account when making purchases.  If you see a $12.00 safety razor on eBay that has a shipping fee of $25.00, how much did it cost?  

True. It's just that about now, everything in the US is about free shipping. Sign up for newsletters from online shaving stores and you get free shipping coupons all the time. Buy  over $49 or whatever their minimum might be, and free shipping. And the killer is Amazon prime. Not only is shipping free but in some cases same day shipping. And this does spoil the public.

This is America. Not only had shipping BETTER be free, if it isn't here in 48 hours, I want a discount. Amazon will extend your Prime membership if it does. It used to be if the pizza didn't arrive at  your door in 30 minutes - free Pizza.

We live in a world of instant gratification.

Now you can say that tub costs $32 and the soap is only $9.  What ever, $41 for 2.3 ounces is high and in my opinion this is proof that the more soap or cream costs has no relationship to the performance.

Sorry, I don't buy into that.

You can buy C&S Oxford for $160 in a container or $32 for the refill. Its the exact same soap. Shove the refill in an old tupperware container and done. It's  you fault if you spend $160.

You can spend $115 for the Boellis Panama Coffret, or $48 for the refill. Good luck storing all those coffrets over the rest of your life

You can spend $36 for i Colonalia Mango in a fancy bowl, or $18 for the refill.

It's your choice to spend the extra money or not.

I have for the last few years only purchased refills and put them in Pyrex bowls. However, in 2014 even the refill was much more than $9. I can't prove it because the company I purchased them from changed their software and all the history was lost. So the point that you may buy into, Edwin Jagger was an expensive soap and in my opinion it was not worth the price.

As a follow up on the theory that soaps that cost more may be better than soaps that cost less which leads into a topic of " social class".  Let me present this to you.  In March 2014 I purchased a tub of Edwin Jagger Limes  & Pomegranate in a wood bowl and paid $41.  The actual soap is 2.3 ounces.  This is the worst soap I have purchased as far as lathering and performance.  I wrote to Edwin Jagger and complained, but said it may have been a bad batch.  They were nice enough to send me a free refill which I thought was no better.  Two pucks and one is no better than the other in my opinion.  I think I am right when I say that many of the mail order houses are selling refills for $9. maybe to get rid of their inventory.  Now you can say that tub costs $32 and the soap is only $9.  What ever, $41 for 2.3 ounces is high and in my opinion this is proof that the more soap or cream costs has no relationship to the performance.

Now you're touching on the psychology of pricing of "luxury" goods.  There have been plenty of studies done (mostly by marketing firms) in this field.  People are likely to believe that if something is expensive it must be good and obviously better than a cheaper product.  Even when a product is objectively inferior to another product like for instance European automobiles relative to American or Japanese cars, certain people will buy the inferior more expensive European cars BECAUSE they're more expensive.  It differentiates them as a person who can afford such things just like having a belly in the 18th century differentiated you as a person who could afford food.

My point is (I think I have a point ) there are brands in the wet shaving world that have luxury sounding names and cater to newcomers to the field.  It sounds luxurious or Olde Tyme and must be good.  I assume some folks stick to the mediocre stuff and will even recommend it to others displaying confirmation bias - i.e., they bought it so it must be good otherwise they made a poor buying decision which doesn't jive with their view of themselves as a savvy person and we can't have that.  Incidentally I think the nature of forums such as DFS contributes to a little more openness than we might otherwise see if we were to all meet up in person to discuss the merits of the various shaving products we've bought.  We are more or less anonymous here so our egos aren't at risk so much and we are more likely to admit a poor buying decision and warn others.  Although the wet shaving credo of YMMV will still have most of us trying the panned product to see if it might be different for us.

I have not tried any Edwin Jagger software, however, I am indebted to their DE-89 for a safe and enjoyable entry into the use of the DE razor and I have a very nice Edwin Jagger best badger brush which I am fond of.

Let me bring this to your attention. To begin with I have found out that many companies in Great Britain such as DR Harris, G Trumper, Edwin Jagger, etc do not make their own products they are mainly marketing companies.

Software. When I was corresponding with Edwin Jagger’s customer service they may have slipped when they responded to my claim that I may have purchased a puck from a bad batch. I was told that “they had checked with the company that manufactures their soaps”. They did not say we spoke with OUR manufacturing division. Later I found out that there is at least one large company in London that makes the hard soaps for at least some if not all of the above named companies. The equipment required to make triple milled soaps is expensive. On the other hand Mitchell's Wool Fat does make their own soap so I have been told.

Hardware. If you closely look at the top cap and bottom plate of your razor it looks very similar to some of G Trumper and Muhle razors. I believe Muhle makes most of the razor pieces for these other companies. I own a Muhle R89 and it a great razor. I do not know who makes their brushes.

I own a few DR Harris soaps and at least one of them I can barely smell a fragrance.

As a whole Edwin Jagger is a very good company I am just not found of their soap.

As a whole Edwin Jagger is a very good company I am just not found of their soap.

Unless it's changed, Muhle makes the EJ soaps. I would also agree that they are underwhelming performers although I really like the scent of the Sea Buckthorn soap.

As a whole Edwin Jagger is a very good company I am just not found of their soap.

Unless it's changed, Muhle makes the EJ soaps. I would also agree that they are underwhelming performers although I really like the scent of the Sea Buckthorn soap.

That good to know. It is my understanding that Valor makes soaps for some Art of Shaving products.

As a whole Edwin Jagger is a very good company I am just not found of their soap.

Unless it's changed, Muhle makes the EJ soaps. I would also agree that they are underwhelming performers although I really like the scent of the Sea Buckthorn soap.

That good to know.  It is my understanding that Valor makes soaps for some Art of Shaving products.

Valobra does. They make C&S stuff too [88, O&C].

Unless it's changed, Muhle makes the EJ soaps. I would also agree that they are underwhelming performers although I really like the scent of the Sea Buckthorn soap.

That good to know.  It is my understanding that Valor makes soaps for some Art of Shaving products.

Valobra does. They make C&S stuff too [88, O&C].

Obviously this contract manufacturing for other parties goes on in many sectors not just soap. There are often significant barriers to entry in many businesses, an example being the craft beer brewing industry. Many well known craft brands such as Sam Adams got their start having their beer contract brewed by one of the big breweries. I believe Sam Adams eventually built their own brewery although I'm not sure if it currently produces 100% of their beer. I don't necessarily have a problem with that as long as the product is good and there's no attempt at deception. A shining example of the business model done well, IMO is Krampert's Finest. The soap is made by Soap Smooth to Brian's specifications and using his proprietary fragrance. Its a great soap and a great fragrance and the aftershave is top notch. I have noticed that the EJ and the Muhle lines are identical and its pretty easy to reach the conclusion