Official Luthiers Forum!

Boy... this is tough and I really struggle with it.

Celebrity endorsement in (almost) any market can pay off in spades -- certainly in ours. But as Rick points out this represents a large portion of our annual output.

You look at James Olson and some of the other makers and one major celebrity endorsement really turned out to be a pivotal point in their career. (Not taking anything away from Jim I am sure his guitars are great, but we all have to admit that James Taylor was a major differentiator for him).

I see the value, but it is a risky strategy.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Brock, you bring up a good point about James Taylor and the use of Olson guitars. Certainly this is a great fit since James music uses acoustic guitar in a very mainstream format. He also has a very mature fan base and I am sure many of his fans have the resources to buy Olson. Do you think that your typical 20 something pop star would have fans that would buy guitars between $5-10K (even if they thought they were great guitars)?

_________________
Brad
Avon, OH

Ya gotta get 'em on the way up...

Find great players and work with them. I met Fleetwood Mac before the huge breakthrough of that first album with Lindsey and Stevie.   They were struggling just starting to record Rumours, and they had essentially given up on their previous album which had been out nearly a year.   Suddenly one night someone came into the Record Plant in Sausalito with the latest Billboard. Fleetwood Mac was #1.

I tried to get Gibson to sign Chris Thiele when he was eight years old. Gibson management in Nashville though I was nuts to want to sign an eight year old.   Then he showed up at the Gibson booth at NAMM when he was ten, and he blew everybody away. They gave him the then-top of the line mando...an F-5L, but evidently did not continue the support. Chris now plays a very fine "hand made" luthier instrument from Lynn Dudenbostle, and he's considered the heir apparent to David Grisman...who has covered over the "Gibson" script with gaffer's tape on one of his Loars...

Colin Hay found me...in the Topanga Canyon post office. He knew who I was, but I didn't know who he was until he mentioned Men at Work. Now we're great pals and he's got eight of my instruments.

Van Morrison...I've known a long time bass player/musical director who works with him for about 35 years.   Van now has three of our guitars.

It's all about relationships.   Making them, keeping them, and maintaining them.

I'm late getting in here, but....

Several years ago I read a little book called 'Positioning', which was essentially the same thing we're calling 'branding' here, but with the added factor that you position yourself in relationship to the rest of what's out there. How often does somebody ask you: "How do your guitars compare to Martin or Taylor?". Your answer, in essence, is your position in the market, at least as you see it (which may not be your real position as others see it).

One important point I came away with was that the best position for you to be in would be the most natural one. As has been stated, to try to establish a brand or position that said you were tops in customer service would be useless if you were lousy at it. If you have to 'be your brand' then the best thing might be to make your brand what you are.

Obviously, if you're a curmudgeon with Turrett's syndrom who never takes a bath you might have a problem developing a positive brand image based on reality. Still, if you think hard about it, maybe you can come up with something: so dedicated to your craft that you've transcended the norms of society? Whatever.

George Washington, it is said, actually decided when he was young what he wanted to be, and spent years consciously becoming that person. Most of us are too set in our ways by now to make major changes. In that case, the easiest way to 'be your brand' is to make your brand what you are. NOT what you think you are, or wish you were, or would like to be: what you are. Here's another place where an outside consultant, or even a network of honest friends, can be a help.

As for 'artist endorsements': I fell into the trap once or twice, and learned the lesson the hard way. It's easy to think that Jim Olsen is a big name only because he got Liv and James Taylor to buy his guitars: I fell into that trap once too. The truth is he's a big name because he makes a dang fine guitar, and is a nice guy to boot, who was ready to take off when the opportunity came. Luck favors the prepared.       

Not being afraid to step through doors of opportunity when they open is a very important key to success. On that note, I'll have to say "here, here!" to your post Al.

>>note<< I wrote a long post and erased it all. I dont think there is any more that I can add.

_________________
Reguards,

Ken H

[QUOTE=Rick Turner] David Grisman...who has covered over the "Gibson" script with gaffer's tape on one of his Loars... [/QUOTE]

I know this is off point.. but why in the world would he do such a thing?

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

[QUOTE=Alan Carruth] George Washington, it is said, actually decided when he was young what he wanted to be, and spent years consciously becoming that person. Most of us are too set in our ways by now to make major changes. In that case, the easiest way to 'be your brand' is to make your brand what you are. NOT what you think you are, or wish you were, or would like to be: what you are. Here's another place where an outside consultant, or even a network of honest friends, can be a help. [/quote]

To that point, a guy I work with is somewhat famous for preaching "Branding is the art of sacrifice" -- and I agree with that. Partly it is about focusing on what you "are".. and even more of it is not allowing yourself to become distracted by "what you are not".


[QUOTE=Alan Carruth]It's easy to think that Jim Olsen is a big name only because he got Liv and James Taylor to buy his guitars: I fell into that trap once too. The truth is he's a big name because he makes a dang fine guitar, and is a nice guy to boot, who was ready to take off when the opportunity came. Luck favors the prepared.[/QUOTE]

No doubt about it. I know he is building very nice guitars. But clearly there are a lot of great builders who are wandering around in near obscurity. My only point was that getting James Taylor was a pivotal point in his career.

And I absolutely agree that you make your own luck.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

I know this is off point.. but why in the world would he do such a thing?


David Grisman has singlehandedly done more to bring the mandolin into the 20th, and 21st centuries, than any other musician(yes, even more so than Monroe). Yet, Gibson, in all its eternal wisdom, has failed to acknowledge him. They crank out "artist" models with other player's names left and right, but they've never asked Grisman.

So, he figured, "why give them any more free advertising". On went the tape...

Monroe did him one better. In the late 50's, he'd sent his Loar(THE loar) back to Gibson for a refret, and they 'did him a favor' by re-finishing it, too. Then they charged him for the job. He was so angry he carved "Gibson" out of the headstock with a pocket knife, leaving only "The" and a big hole beneath it. All photos of him and the mandolin through the 60's and 70's shows this(the mandolin's also missing the headstock scroll at this point).  He also took a piece of broken glass and scraped off and removed all that new finish... Years later, they reconciled, and Gibson re-inlaid the headstock(for free <bg>) and didn't ever thing of re-finishing it.

On the marketing front, there's a good point here. Your name, or mark, on the headstock, is important. While your initials in a pretty script might look cool, they do no good whatsoever if they don't tell the passerby what the instrument is. Use a logo that is not only nice, but functional.

[QUOTE=Howard Klepper]This states what Michael Gerber calls "The E Myth" in his series of books (which he has built into his own industry by repeating a few simple things over and over in different formats). The belief in this myth, he says is the reason most small businesses fail. Doing something you do well and telling people about it is not running a business; conversely, running a business has nothing to do with being good at making the product.
[/QUOTE]

What I said had nothing to do with running a business. I was speaking solely about building a brand identity. To build a lasting brand identity, you DO  have to make quality products, or the lack of quality is reflected in your brand identity. I was not talking about running a business at a profit.

Take a look at cars, as an example. Honda has a brand identity that says high quality cars that need minimal service work, sold at reasonable prices.

Chevy, on the other hand, has a brand identity that says overpriced, poor quality cars that will be in the shop a lot.

Chevy did not try to build that brand identity. Both Chevy and Honda try to build a brand identity that says quality. But Chevy failed. What was the biggest difference? The quality of the product.

You cannot create a good, lasting brand identity if you do not build quality products. Building high quality products does not mean you will run a successful business, but it is the foundation. It is much more difficult to build a lasting business if you produce junk.

As for Gerber, you have to first look at the focus of his ideas. Gerber says that the  way to make money from starting your own business is to launch it and sell it. 

So, if your goal is to start a business and sell it, you can afford to make low quality products because you will no longer be involved in the company when the reality of your product quality becomes widely known.

Jim

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel]So, if your goal is to start a business and sell it, you can afford to make low quality products because you will no longer be involved in the company when the reality of your product quality becomes widely known.Jim[/QUOTE]


What a dim view....

Sure there are con artists in every nook and cranny of the world, but I can tell you from the seat of experience that starting businesses and selling them is a very good (perhaps "the") way for entrepreneurs to make money.

Just because your "liquidity event" has a short time-line horizon doesn't mean that you are out to produce junk or scam anyone and flip it to the next sucker that comes along. Often the entrepreneur is in love with his/her concept and has a vision that they bring to market - yet the economic realities are that:

1) They simply don't have the financial resources to scale it. They built the idea on a shoestring (or money they could personally raise), proved the concept, and now that wind is starting to fill the sails they have nowhere close to the financial resources, management or experience to "take it to the next level".

2) They will get clobbered by the "big boys" once they notice the success, so it is smart to partner up with someone who has the money and distribution capabilities for your concept. What good is it to pioneer a great idea only to watch it be copied by an industry giant who sidelines you to obscurity?

3) Usually "new idea" businesses struggle financially or lose money and private entrepreneurs (with or without VC's behind them) can only do this for so long.

and finally... usually (albeit not always) when an entrepreneur sells a business the terms are a multi year pay out where the final price of the business is somewhat dependant on future success. So it behooves the entrepreneur to make sure s/he is selling a quality business and fully discloses to the new owner all of the plusses and minuses of the business.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Dim view indeed...

Having been involved in starting, going public or selling off a few small entities, I can assure you that quality is never compromised. In fact, it is one of the most important aspects in positioning a company for sale.

Having also been on the other end involving due diligence on an acquisition, quality, as defined by the customer, is always one of the most important attributes. As a business you can NEVER afford to make low quality products. If you can't meet the quality as defined by the customer, then you can't afford to be in that business.

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com

[QUOTE=Brock Poling]
Sure there are con artists in every nook and cranny of the world, but I can tell you from the seat of experience that starting businesses and selling them is a very good (perhaps "the") way for entrepreneurs to make money.


[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is the best way. If you read any of Michael Gerber's stuff, that is what he says should be the main goal of an entrepreneur. With that goal in mind, everything an entrepreneur does should be with the purpose of creating maximum sale value for the company. Achieving that goal does not always line up with what is best for the company in the long term.

It's the same thinking as public corporations that hurt themselves in the long term because management is focused on quarterly numbers and quarterly returns, or the private equity people that buy companies and make large cuts in operating expenses so that they can take the companies public and attract a lot of investors.

I think a long term view is the better way to go, and to me, that means focus on quality products and protecting your name.

Jim

[QUOTE=JJ Donohue]As a business you can NEVER afford to make low quality products.


[/QUOTE]

Just take a look at a lot of the formerly "quality" brand names that are now attached to junk products. In electronics alone, think of Fisher, Advent, Harmon-Kardon and more. They exist only to make short term profits and when people begin to associate the names with low quality, the brand names are just retired.

In a lot of businesses, brand names have become meaningless because the products are all the same. What's the difference now between TVs from Magnavox, RCA, Phillips, Quasar or other brands? There is no difference. All of them are attached to cheap products that  come off the same assembly line, are designed to be sold at low prices, work for a while and they be discarded. There is no thought to quality.

All you have to do is take a look at the junk being offered for sale in the typical retail store and you can see that concern for product quality is not universal.

Jim

[QUOTE=Brock Poling]and finally... usually (albeit not always) when an entrepreneur sells a business the terms are a multi year pay out where the final price of the business is somewhat dependant on future success. [/QUOTE]

Why would anyone enter into a sales agreement in which the amount of money they receive is dependent on someone else managing the business and profitability? The buyer can do too many things that will make the results appear to be worse than they actually are.

Jim

First off, I'm sorry my post implied that Jim was saying branding is all there is to running a business. I didn't mean that; rather I wanted to point out the fallacy of thinking that if you build a good product and just be yourself you will succeed. Gerber has named the fallacy is a starting point for comparing it with a profit-oriented entrepreneurial model.

And Gerber's model may be the way to make money as an entrepreneur, but it has little relevance to a one-person guitar making business. Most of what I took away from his book (which I didn't finish, frankly) is that you can't expect the world to beat a path to your door because you are doing what you love and are good at. And that individual lutherie is not really entrepreneurship, and the chances of making real-world money on your investment are slim.

As for quality being a necessity, that doesn't seem to keep the typical Chinese factory from making money while simply making something as cheaply as it can be done. There are a lot of exceptions in China, of course. But an awful lot of products that impress me as cheap junk seem to come from there, and I hear that they make a lot of profit on this model.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

With that goal in mind, everything an entrepreneur does should be with
the purpose of creating maximum sale value for the company.

I understand completely what you're saying and trying to convey, but that, and much of this thread, does not apply to 99% of us. Maybe a show of hands is needed to prove it, but I'd guess that most of us have no inclination to become the next Bob Taylor, or even the next Rick Turner. I'll stick my neck out and say most of us want to simply be successful one-man operations. Perhaps with a helper or two, at most.

With that in mind, the majority of this thread is pointless, as the big business and/or entrepreneur model does not apply. I mean, who here would be willing to buy me out, with my order book? Really, even if you did, you're not me, so how could you build -my- instruments? and do you think my clients would settle for it? they didn't wait 5+ years only t find out someone else is going to fill their order, even if they place my name on the headstock. It flat won't work, no more tan i could build a Klepper...

See? Be the brand, because in one-man shops, we -are- the brand. That was the only thing the was relevant to most of us in this thread.

[QUOTE=grumpy]I understand completely what you're saying and trying to convey, but that, and much of this thread, does not apply to 99% of us.[/QUOTE]

You're right. I'm sorry for following the digression.

Jim

I have nothing to add except thank you to all who have participated in this thread. Your insight and expertise is very much appreciated.

Once again thank you for "Marketing for the small shop luthier 101"

Ceil

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel]With that goal in mind, everything an entrepreneur does should be with the purpose of creating maximum sale value for the company. Achieving that goal does not always line up with what is best for the company in the long term.[/QUOTE]

What a load of crap. You're right, but your implication toward motivation couldn't be more wrong.

The "short term" focus is on "SURVIVAL" not cutting corners to pocket more in a sale. Far from it. Entrepreneurs are so committed that it isn't even funny. They have obligations tied to their personal assets, pay payroll out of their pockets when customers are slow paying, beg for money from all their friends and relatives, and pitch the religion 24x7.

So, when an entrepreneur "cuts corners" it is often because they simply cannot do what they would like. Either they don't have the resources to do it (labor or brainpower) or the capital to implement.

... walking away shaking head...

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

[QUOTE=grumpy] With that goal in mind, everything an entrepreneur does should be with
the purpose of creating maximum sale value for the company.I understand completely what you're saying and trying to convey, but that, and much of this thread, does not apply to 99% of us. Maybe a show of hands is needed to prove it, but I'd guess that most of us have no inclination to become the next Bob Taylor, or even the next Rick Turner. I'll stick my neck out and say most of us want to simply be successful one-man operations. Perhaps with a helper or two, at most.With that in mind, the majority of this thread is pointless, as the big business and/or entrepreneur model does not apply. I mean, who here would be willing to buy me out, with my order book? Really, even if you did, you're not me, so how could you build -my- instruments? and do you think my clients would settle for it? they didn't wait 5+ years only t find out someone else is going to fill their order, even if they place my name on the headstock. It flat won't work, no more tan i could build a Klepper...See? Be the brand, because in one-man shops, we -are- the brand. That was the only thing the was relevant to most of us in this thread.[/QUOTE]


You're right.. we wandered a bit off point -- but it is still an interesting discussion.   

I agree with you though we "are" the brand in everything we do. My only point originally is that we can plan for that brand and control what we project to the public. Not as a deception, but rather as a focus on the positive points we want to communicate.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Grumpy is 100% correct.I`ve been a building contractor for thirty years.What I sell is my Quality work.It has all been word of mouth.I can`t keep up with the work I have now .There is no way any kind of advertising or marketing could have built what I have.I work every day on the job creating whatever it is the customer wants.It`s just me and my son.That is why they hire me.The customer is basically putting their trust in me and my knowledge.That`s pretty much it in a nutshell.        &nb sp; 
                        James         & nbsp;   
                       

_________________
James W Bolan
Nashville Tennessee

[QUOTE=Hesh1956]My apologies for my own digressing. [/QUOTE]

Don't apologize! My family had strong ties to GE for decades. My dad's entire career was with GE, and my uncle (dad's brother) is the only man in the history of GE to go from warehouse worker to Executive. We always like to hear what is happening there. I know Welch was considered a great CEO, but he also killed a lot of their divisions too, putting a lot of folks out of work. His mentality of "Be #1 or #2 in any given industry or get out" was short-sighted. Sounds like the new guy has a different take on things...and it sounds healthy.

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."