July 15, 2005

the future is “boutique”?

zzzmkghilkj39.jpg
A nice thought from Cate­rina, which of course got me thin­king about how it all fits in with English Cut:

As I was saying to Andy the other day, the mar­ket­place used to be a human place, where peo­ple exchan­ged the goods they’d grown or made, and each exchange was an exchange bet­ween peo­ple. Now there are super­mar­kets and Wal­mart, and I had a con­ver­sa­tion with a clerk at Bor­ders who said that they were going to replace him with a sys­tem whe­reby your goods were tallied by an RFID rea­der as you wal­ked out the door. There’s something dif­fe­rent about kno­wing the peo­ple who make your clothes and grow your food, and I think that this will be an enor­mous force going forward.

One thing I’m noti­cing is an inc­rease in the word “bes­poke” being used around the blo­gosphere. Is that partly English Cut’s doing? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps it’s just a word my radar is more attu­ned to, now that I’ve got­ten into the tai­lo­ring busi­ness.
[Spea­king of tai­lo­ring:] A few weeks ago I was mes­sing around with the idea of going into the ready-to-wear (i.e. chea­per) end of the busi­ness.
I have to say I’m losing enthu­siasm for the idea. Two main rea­sons:

1. It chea­pens the brand. Of course it does.
2. A wee voice tells me that it is far easier to sell one $3000 suit than it is to sell ten $300 suits.

Something worth thin­king about, in any business.

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

12 Responses to “the future is “boutique”?”

  1. Eugen Erhan says:

    No, it’s not easier.
    If you can sell one 300$ suit, then you can also sell another and another, and when you’ve sold ten, you might as well sell a zillion more.
    Otoh, maybe you’ll never sell that $3000 suit.
    In Roy Williams’s words, news flash: sell to the mas­ses, live with the clas­ses. Sell to the clas­ses, live with the mas­ses. (oh and my favo­rite: peo­ple who work for very rich clients are called ‘but­lers’)
    sorry about the appro­xi­ma­tion of the quotes.

  2. hugh macleod says:

    If you can sell one 3000$ suit, then you can also sell another and another, and when you’ve sold ten, you might as well sell a zillion more.
    Otoh, maybe you’ll never sell that $300 suit. ;-)

  3. frosty says:

    Peo­ple who work for very rich clients are some­ti­mes called “artists.“
    What about $300 bes­poke Gaping­Void t-shirts?

  4. Hugh
    Is not the point that in a world when we all can buy a cheap suit that having a real one that is hand made satis­fies a need for mai­ning. I bought a cork­pu­ller the other day — the really fancy one — for $20. 10 years ago these cost $250. You can buy a DVD pla­yer for $35. Stuff is cheap and get­ting chae­per — but the pro­cess to make stuff chea­per is socially and spi­ri­tually debi­li­ta­ting.
    My son has a friend Jen who makes bes­poske hand­bags that sell for hun­dreds of dollars. Ima­gine that you are married — it is your wife’s 30th. What would it mean to give her a Jen Bag. What would it mean for her to buy you a Tom suit.
    Isn’t the won­der of the web that Tom and Jen would only have a small local mar­ket but now can access the world?

  5. hugh macleod says:

    Rob, I totally agree. The web is indeed a won­der.
    To do what Tom and I are doing without the net, you’d need to add at least 3 zeroes onto the end of the numbers.

  6. Eric says:

    The pro­blem, in my expe­rience, with pri­cing ques­tions like these is that the $300 cus­to­mer expects every bit as much cus­to­mer ser­vice and atten­tion as the $3000 cus­to­mer. i.e. (in soft­ware) You cut some­body a break b/c they are a non-profit, and give them a $10,000 web­site for $2,500, with the unders­tan­ding that it might not have a glitzy CMS or be fully inte­gra­ted with their exis­ting data­base. Still, they’re happy to have a site that looks like they spent a lot more than they did. But then, guess who’s calling you 3 weeks after launch asking you to add new con­tent, new pages, export the data­base and etc. Then mul­tiply this by the num­ber of dis­coun­ted sites you had to sell to equal the price of one full-price job. But maybe cus­to­mer ser­vice is dif­fe­rent with suits. I mean, what could go wrong? =)

  7. hugh macleod says:

    Eric, you nai­led it in one. Suits are very much like soft­ware…
    Price insen­si­tive cus­to­mers are best!!!!

  8. Pat says:

    Hugh,
    My gut says the $300 suit is a bad idea. It could be a suc­cess­ful busi­ness move but it runs the risk of being a com­plete pain in the ass and much less fun.

  9. hugh macleod says:

    Yeah, Pat, I’m star­ting to think the same…

  10. Dave says:

    Hugh,
    How about leve­ra­ging the brand and having some else handle the logis­tics? You see this all the time with clothing “labels” where the big com­pany (e.g. Clai­borne?) buys up the label, lea­ves the designers/founders/brand buil­ders in place and sup­ple­ments their efforts with world-class logis­tics and dis­tri­bu­tion.
    I think the $300 suit idea could be done … with the right partner!

  11. Chris H. says:

    Hugh,
    why not do a Jamie Oli­ver. Create and Sell the books, sell the videos, sell other bits of merchan­dise (the­med around the idea of bes­poke or Tho­mas). That’s where your mass mar­ket is. Don’t kill your meme — finest suits money can buy hand made by crafts­man. Don’t fuc­king touch that one. That is your gol­den egg.

  12. hugh macleod says:

    “Don’t fuc­king touch that one. That is your gol­den egg.“
    Yeah Chris, that is what I’m thin­king as well. At least for the fore­seea­ble future.