JohnRoberts

Slick... or Smart?
« on: November 07, 2017, 03:14:10 PM »
I was thinking about doing a poll, but these first examples seem clear..

#1 Is the idea to print labels on the inside of underwear  slick or smart.... I vote smart....

------

#2  Is offering a lifetime warranty on small kitchen tools (like a can opener) that cost the same or more to return for a refund as replacing, slick or smart..... I vote slick... at POS lifetime warranty seems valuable until you try to collect.

------

#3 Ok this one is a little both... I recently bought an indoor bug trap that uses blue LEDs to attract (?) bugs, with a replaceable sticky paper that detaches and gets replaced (like razor blades).  This business model gives a major hint to this product's parentage,  P&G the mass consumer products company.   Kind of smart to reinvent fly paper and package it into a replaceable cartridge that mom will refill several times a year... (if it works).   After several months there are low single digit dead insects in each trap so no hurry to replace, the fly paper is still sticky. Maybe MS bugs are colorblind.   

Now for the slick part... the company selling these (a special P&G division) sent an email asking for a review. When I ignored that they sent me a follow up email, asking me to help their "small company start up"... now that was the slick part, since I knew they had the muscle and might of P&G behind them, pretending to be a small company.... my a____.

JR
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...


gyraf

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2017, 01:12:51 AM »
Penny&Giles??! Or am I culturally challenged in this?

Jakob E.
..note to self: don't let Harman run your company..

Squeaky

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2017, 02:10:41 AM »
Your head is in the right place. Proctor & Gamble are the multinational being referred to I believe.

PRR

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2017, 02:22:37 AM »
Proctor and Gamble.
https://us.pg.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble

A candle maker and a soap maker came to the US and married sisters, became partners, landed a contract to supply soap and candles for the US civil war. Later introduced Ivory soap and Crisco lard-substitute, and got big into radio advertising. Tide, Prell, Crest, Charmin, Downy, Pampers, acquired Gillette, Folgers, Pepto-Bismol, DuraCell, Pringles.... you can NOT run a US household without P&G. P&G is notorious for "competing" brands: 17 kinds of soap, 17 product managers trying to out-sell each other, meanwhile forcing other soap companies out of the stores.

66 brands listed, and I suspect they forgot a few.

My dog is on Prilosec. We clean the floor with Swiffer; dishes with Ivory, sink with Comet. Blow our noses with Puffs. There's gotta be a Gillette razor in the house.

"Printer-ink" bug strips are not soap, but within P&G's giant reach.

bluebird

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2017, 02:37:04 AM »
Grew up in Cincinnati, OH. had a job where I drove past P&G everyday. There was always a new perfume or flavor smell when I drove by and it was strong. Always seemed to be a derivative of peach. Probably within a 3 mile radius. Don't know how people lived with that.

Heat shrink only shrinks around the diameter and not length wise.  Smart!


JohnRoberts

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2017, 10:21:43 AM »
Penny&Giles??! Or am I culturally challenged in this?

Jakob E.
Sorry, I ASSumed P&G was recognizable.... Proctor and Gamble HUGE consumer products company, ironically their money printing razor blade business is being eroded by smaller upstart competitors...

JR
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2017, 11:10:45 AM »
Grew up in Cincinnati, OH. had a job where I drove past P&G everyday. There was always a new perfume or flavor smell when I drove by and it was strong. Always seemed to be a derivative of peach. Probably within a 3 mile radius. Don't know how people lived with that.

I'm about 2 miles from the Ivorydale facility right now (and as usual)... but they sold it a few years ago and do less of their own manufacturing now, so there is less smell and only when they are running and there is a steady wind going this way, fortunately. On the other hand, about 20 years ago I visited a friend who lived in Spring Grove Village, much closer to it, in a really cheap place... I instantly knew why it was cheap. I wouldn't have lasted a day there.

JohnRoberts

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #7 on: November 08, 2017, 11:20:03 AM »
Proctor and Gamble.
https://us.pg.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble

A candle maker and a soap maker came to the US and married sisters, became partners, landed a contract to supply soap and candles for the US civil war. Later introduced Ivory soap and Crisco lard-substitute, and got big into radio advertising. Tide, Prell, Crest, Charmin, Downy, Pampers, acquired Gillette, Folgers, Pepto-Bismol, DuraCell, Pringles.... you can NOT run a US household without P&G. P&G is notorious for "competing" brands: 17 kinds of soap, 17 product managers trying to out-sell each other, meanwhile forcing other soap companies out of the stores.

66 brands listed, and I suspect they forgot a few.

My dog is on Prilosec. We clean the floor with Swiffer; dishes with Ivory, sink with Comet. Blow our noses with Puffs. There's gotta be a Gillette razor in the house.

"Printer-ink" bug strips are not soap, but within P&G's giant reach.
Not to veer my own thread but the heyday for big brand businesses may be fading. I already shared how their razor blade business that was like printing money has been disrupted... for years they had comfortably drove it with technology,,, who can stack more small blades into a razor cartridge. But they got disrupted by lower tech that attacked their distribution model.

Most  large food stores where P&G make their bread and butter already have generic brands, and my sense is that consumers are less reluctant to try same but cheaper goods. Two large food store chains are trying to gain market share in the US based on a lower cost store brand model, but established players are already playing that song.

The loser appears to me to be P&G and big brand dependant sellers. But what would I know? I'm cheap and have been buying generic store brands for decades.

JR
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...

PRR

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #8 on: November 08, 2017, 01:05:08 PM »
P&G has many factories. Originally to reduce distribution cost, but surely also to get away from labor costs and exploit poorer workers.

Business model disruption-- you mean Dollar Shave Club? I believe they were bought-out by one of the biggies, and P&G is a likely octopus.

PRR

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #9 on: November 08, 2017, 01:27:02 PM »
Smart or slick BS??

I got a tout for WaterProfit. Small dingus to reduce your water bill.

They claim that utility water has air in it, and that water meters go by displacement so count air the same as water. Both claims are true.

But how much air is in the incoming water? If it were a "lot" we'd have sputtering faucets. We do, but very very slightly. A more quantitative observation: when I change my string-wound water filter, there is air in the winding. For a while the water runs very "fizzy", jillions of tiny bubbles, not normal water. By the possible volume of air in the winding, and the total water flow to work this out, "fizzy" water is <1% air. So normal water must be <<1% air, and less at city pressure (air shrinks water doesn't).

OK, say the <<1% reduction in reading justifies technical tricks. Their device *appears* to be a pressure reducer after the meter. Their cartoon video shows the air backing up before the meter, less air after the meter. If it increased the pressure through the meter that would make smaller bubbles. But the intake side of the meter is connected to a large pipe system, pressure won't increase. Conceptually we could remove the air before the meter. But you are not supposed to attach devices before the meter (you could cheat); and WaterProfit clearly goes after the meter. And has no air output, it is all inside the pipe at the union junction. So where does the air go? If it stays in the pipe from main to meter, eventually you will get a glug of air. There's no real incentive for air in your main-meter pipe to go back out to the main and into someone else's meter-- either water flows into your house or it is stagnant (maybe a small turbulence in the first foot off the main).

They do claim reduced water bills. I thought they guaranteed it, but I am not finding the details on their glossy site. Because the device reduces pressure at the tap, if you always wash hands for 30 seconds, lower tap pressure is lower water used. However washing machines and toilets will flow until full, and your bathtub is still the same size, unless you quit filling at lower water level because you get impatient.

I call "Smart". For them. The price is low, the claims are large and superficially plausibly valid. If you can sell $5 of plastic through major retailers for $50, the company should come out ahead.


JohnRoberts

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #10 on: November 08, 2017, 02:54:37 PM »
Smart or slick BS??

I got a tout for WaterProfit. Small dingus to reduce your water bill.

They claim that utility water has air in it, and that water meters go by displacement so count air the same as water. Both claims are true.

But how much air is in the incoming water? If it were a "lot" we'd have sputtering faucets. We do, but very very slightly. A more quantitative observation: when I change my string-wound water filter, there is air in the winding. For a while the water runs very "fizzy", jillions of tiny bubbles, not normal water. By the possible volume of air in the winding, and the total water flow to work this out, "fizzy" water is <1% air. So normal water must be <<1% air, and less at city pressure (air shrinks water doesn't).

OK, say the <<1% reduction in reading justifies technical tricks. Their device *appears* to be a pressure reducer after the meter. Their cartoon video shows the air backing up before the meter, less air after the meter. If it increased the pressure through the meter that would make smaller bubbles. But the intake side of the meter is connected to a large pipe system, pressure won't increase. Conceptually we could remove the air before the meter. But you are not supposed to attach devices before the meter (you could cheat); and WaterProfit clearly goes after the meter. And has no air output, it is all inside the pipe at the union junction. So where does the air go? If it stays in the pipe from main to meter, eventually you will get a glug of air. There's no real incentive for air in your main-meter pipe to go back out to the main and into someone else's meter-- either water flows into your house or it is stagnant (maybe a small turbulence in the first foot off the main).

They do claim reduced water bills. I thought they guaranteed it, but I am not finding the details on their glossy site. Because the device reduces pressure at the tap, if you always wash hands for 30 seconds, lower tap pressure is lower water used. However washing machines and toilets will flow until full, and your bathtub is still the same size, unless you quit filling at lower water level because you get impatient.

I call "Smart". For them. The price is low, the claims are large and superficially plausibly valid. If you can sell $5 of plastic through major retailers for $50, the company should come out ahead.
This is the epitome of what I consider slick....  A flow restrictor may reduce bulk use of water, like showers or running faucets.  (I had to add a permeate pump to increase water pressure for my RO filter).

I do not believe the claims. The air bubble theory is total whohah.

Reduced water consumption up to 40% (cough) and pays for itself in months??  Not to mention who is going to install it themselves?

My water bill has a flat fee up to a consumption level I haven't come close to hitting since I replaced my water feed pipe that was leaking under my yard, a few years ago.

JR

PS: Yes, dollar shave club was bought by unilever  for $1B, they were also sued by Gillette for patent infringement last year...  looks like they were effective at taking market share from the established players.  Unilever is #2 behind P&G in total consumer sales. Shick is #2 behind Gillette for razors but they are all changing their business model in light of shave club success (lower price subscription service vs former high tech more blades and tricks ).
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...

Scodiddly

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #11 on: November 08, 2017, 08:02:56 PM »
Now for the slick part... the company selling these (a special P&G division) sent an email asking for a review. When I ignored that they sent me a follow up email, asking me to help their "small company start up"... now that was the slick part, since I knew they had the muscle and might of P&G behind them, pretending to be a small company.... my a____.

The likely story behind "Not Your Father's Root Beer" as well. Great story, little local brewery... but how the heck are they managing to have that stuff in every store, every bar, etc.?

FWIW I found "Dorco" razors online, cheap and I often get a month out of each cartridge. My web searching along the Dollar Shave Club indicated that Dorco made all those non-major-brand razors.

JohnRoberts

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2017, 10:29:00 AM »
The likely story behind "Not Your Father's Root Beer" as well. Great story, little local brewery... but how the heck are they managing to have that stuff in every store, every bar, etc.?

FWIW I found "Dorco" razors online, cheap and I often get a month out of each cartridge. My web searching along the Dollar Shave Club indicated that Dorco made all those non-major-brand razors.
Yes there are too many recent beer brands to list in the supermarket posing as microbreweries that are operated by Budweiser or Miller (or whoever owns them now).

It's called marketing and brand management.... FWIW I haven't seen generic store brand beer yet.... may be an opportunity?  ::)

It is pretty clear that Walmart doesn't make their own canned foods..... although they have started processing their own milk, from farms they operate. 

JR
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...

PRR

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2017, 07:58:05 PM »
The truly generic (no art no brand) products went in and out of style in the 1980s.

Walgreen's Drug sells a beery product at low price but it has artwork and a name "Big Flats 1901" on the can.


I'm suspecting that big store chains do not want their prime tradename in the news about drunken accidents or parties, or laying in my ditches. (On a good day I get 15 cents that way.)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 08:03:20 PM by PRR »

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #14 on: November 09, 2017, 08:26:10 PM »
Since the arrival of a few big chain German supermarkets here I get great beer for between 1.10 -1.30 euro a can (500ml)
The usual suspects like Bud Heiniken etc retail for well over the 2 euro a can mark .
Now the government is supposedly considering measures to tackle problem drinking ,they want to force retailers to charge at least 2 euros a can and 7.50 for a bottle of wine . First of all its going to hit the poorest hardest ,second of all the big players like Diageo(Guinness) and Heiniken will most likely see a huge rise in their profits if the differential between the cheap n cheerfull brands and prestige brands comes down .Like somebody said on the radio this morning ,theres nothing this government does that isnt linked to pulling in more in tax revenue, except of course when it comes to taxing the corporations.
Were already way out of step with the rest of europe in terms of tobacco tax ,what would cost me 10 euros in Holland (50 grams) would cost more than 2.5 times that here ,with the result that paramilitary gangs are switching to smuggling tobacco now .

Gene Pink

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2017, 08:32:39 PM »
... or laying in my ditches. (On a good day I get 15 cents that way.)
Interesting side job. You must get really muddy when it rains.  :o

 ;D

JohnRoberts

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2017, 10:19:41 PM »
The truly generic (no art no brand) products went in and out of style in the 1980s.

Walgreen's Drug sells a beery product at low price but it has artwork and a name "Big Flats 1901" on the can.


I'm suspecting that big store chains do not want their prime tradename in the news about drunken accidents or parties, or laying in my ditches. (On a good day I get 15 cents that way.)
Well surprisingly I have an anecdote... Back in the 60's when I was too young to buy beer legally, I had cojones that suggested otherwise, and while I was one of the youngest of the 7 students living in a 3 bedroom apartment on Beacon street (Boston), I was the only one the liquor store clerks believed was old enough to buy beer..... so I did, several times a day...Pretty soon they didn't want to ask, in case I wasn't old enough and they would lose their best customer.  ;D

Being students, money was always tight and we often were on the lookout for a bargain beer  (to give the girls at our parties). If you hand each girl a beer when they walk in the door they will stay at least a few minutes before leaving the party, increasing the odds of a good time for somebody. 

I will never forget this beer .. the brand name was "Coburger"...  $2.69 a case back in the 60s so pretty much cheaper than dirt.. As I recall it was so bad, even the girls wouldn't drink it... we ended up pouring what was left down the drain the next morning. Never had beer left over after a party before Coburger, or after.  ::)

JR

PS: I just googled it and it's a real beer, but that stuff we got 50 odd years ago was really really nasty...  :o
John Roberts
http://circularscience.com
Tune it, or don't play it...

gyraf

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2017, 05:28:51 AM »
*like*
..note to self: don't let Harman run your company..

bluebird

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2017, 06:22:44 PM »
I will never forget this beer .. the brand name was "Coburger"...  $2.69 a case back in the 60s so pretty much cheaper than dirt..

Our version in the 90's was Milwaukee's Best or adoringly known as "The Beast"

Matador

Re: Slick... or Smart?
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2017, 11:19:23 PM »
Our version in the 90's was Milwaukee's Best or adoringly known as "The Beast"
*shudder* That brings back memories - that, and 'Natural Light'.  *shudder again*