Goulet Dropped Waterman?

[Dr Dan]

Goulet I understood dropped the pens. The ink went with as a causality of dropping the pens. Waterman and Parker were iconic brands once. I guess when the people that make Tupperware own you (both brands and what's left of Rotring), what we now see shouldn't be all that unexpected.

[Moonshae]

  On 6/2/2017 at 3:34 PM, Olya said:

 

Seems really weird.. So not enough is sold and you then drop a vendor, so that your brand is even less accessbile and overall even less is sold?

Anyone know a logic reason for a brand doing this?

How about they release some new stuff, bring back nice models from the past and do more ink wise, maybe people will then buy more.

 

It is possible to have a customer that costs you money if sales aren't sufficient to justify the support that customer receives. As a hypothetical, and I am in no way implying that this is the case here, a customer who has regular returns but low sales volume will incur greater costs (shipping, restocking, accounting, etc) than profits, so a business may fire that customer even though it reduces overall exposure. Besides, if sales are that low, the exposure loss isn't substantial. No one here is at a loss as to where they might find Waterman products now that Goulet isn't carrying them.

 

Also, price breaks may be extended to customers based on volume, and rather than charge low volume customers a price that will make them noncompetitive (since their prices will be higher than others) and further lowering sales, they just cut them out completely.

 

From Goulet's standpoint, it might be best for them, too. Products that don't sell take space that could be devoted to products that do, and the carrying cost of inventory is not insignificant.

[Olya]

  On 6/2/2017 at 6:39 PM, Cyber6 said:

 

 

Conspiracy Theory... Maybe, just maybe .,... they bought the competition. Newell might have another brand they want to promote better

Well, they wouldn't be the first company to do that

 

 

  On 6/2/2017 at 6:54 PM, Moonshae said:

 

It is possible to have a customer that costs you money if sales aren't sufficient to justify the support that customer receives. As a hypothetical, and I am in no way implying that this is the case here, a customer who has regular returns but low sales volume will incur greater costs (shipping, restocking, accounting, etc) than profits, so a business may fire that customer even though it reduces overall exposure. Besides, if sales are that low, the exposure loss isn't substantial. No one here is at a loss as to where they might find Waterman products now that Goulet isn't carrying them.

 

Also, price breaks may be extended to customers based on volume, and rather than charge low volume customers a price that will make them noncompetitive (since their prices will be higher than others) and further lowering sales, they just cut them out completely.

 

From Goulet's standpoint, it might be best for them, too. Products that don't sell take space that could be devoted to products that do, and the carrying cost of inventory is not insignificant.

 

I have been considering a bit the same. Shipping etc might in the long run be too costly for Waterman to keep business with one vendor for little profit.

 

They are nonetheless shooting themselves in the foot and slowly killing off the brand by inactivity, sleeping on the job and dropping sales points...

[Moonshae]

  On 6/2/2017 at 6:42 PM, Dr Dan said:

Waterman and Parker were iconic brands once. I guess when the people that make Tupperware own you (both brands and what's left of Rotring), what we now see shouldn't be all that unexpected.

 

Kodak was an iconic brand once, but its own leadership chose current gains in film sales rather than investment in digital because the margins weren't high enough. Leadership there drove that company into the ground, so while a parent company may have an influence, it could just as easily be a leadership team at Waterman (which is separate from the leadership at Tupperware) that wants to try to maintain their image rather than turn to all the new and exciting things other pen and ink makers are doing.

 

Further, the market has changed. Fountain pens are a niche market, at least in terms of general writing instruments; they're probably well represented when considering only the market for luxury writing instruments. It's very difficult for a big company to turn away from a profitable model even when it sees smoke on the horizon...investors want the company to shift gears while maintaining profits, which may not always be possible.

[Moonshae]

  On 6/2/2017 at 7:06 PM, Olya said:

 

They are nonetheless shooting themselves in the foot and slowly killing off the brand by inactivity, sleeping on the job and dropping sales points...

 

It does seem that way. I wasn't making the case that their business was sound, only that the decision to end a relationship a customer isn't always a bad one.

[Olya]

  On 6/2/2017 at 7:09 PM, Moonshae said:

 

It does seem that way. I wasn't making the case that their business was sound, only that the decision to end a relationship a customer isn't always a bad one.

No worries, I just like to repeat myself haha

[ParkerDuofold]

  On 6/2/2017 at 6:29 PM, OCArt said:

Bye, bye Waterman.

 

Mmmmmmm.... ink and peanut butter.... my favorite combination.

 

- Anthony

[ParkerDuofold]

  On 6/2/2017 at 6:54 PM, Moonshae said:

...From Goulet's standpoint, it might be best for them, too. Products that don't sell take space that could be devoted to products that do, and the carrying cost of inventory is not insignificant.

BINGO! And don't forget it has to be carried on the ledgers, too.

 

However, some are saying it wasn't the Goulets idea.

 

There have also been rumours flying around that Lamy is moving to B&M only dealers, (although I haven't looked in to this, myself, yet). Perhaps there is a movement among some EU brands to clear away from internet-ONLY dealers???

 

- Anthony

Edited June 2, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[MHBru]

  On 6/2/2017 at 5:39 PM, Olya said:

Waterman has been as dormant as Parker has (save for the overhauled IM, Urban, Sonnet) and I notice to my astonishment that Rotring has also fallen way off the wayside.

All owned now by Newell. Coincidence? I think not.

 

Why buy three iconic pen brands and then not do anything with them and basically let them die a slow & disgraceful death?

I noticed that about Rotring too. I have an old (but still perfect) 700 rollerball and pencil. I was looking for ink for the RB and their site seemed very oriented toward engineers and technical types. (Ended up using a spare Pelikan roller ball cartridge as they are identical)

[LizEF]

  On 6/2/2017 at 8:42 PM, ParkerDuofold said:

There have also been rumours flying around that Lamy is moving to B&M only dealers, (although I haven't looked in to this, myself, yet). Perhaps there is a movement among some EU brands to clear away from internet-ONLY dealers???

 

- Anthony

 

Let's hope that doesn't take off because I'd bet 90+% of Americans don't live within reasonable traveling distance of a B&M fountain pen store. It wouldn't surprise me if some states don't even have one.

 

(And why on earth would they want to shoot themselves in the foot? I've spent ridiculous amounts of money on fountain pen stuff, and except for one pen bought in 1993~ Vienna, 100% was purchased online.)

[ParkerDuofold]

  On 6/2/2017 at 9:09 PM, LizEF said:

 

Let's hope that doesn't take off because I'd bet 90+% of Americans don't live within reasonable traveling distance of a B&M fountain pen store. It wouldn't surprise me if some states don't even have one.

 

(And why on earth would they want to shoot themselves in the foot? I've spent ridiculous amounts of money on fountain pen stuff, and except for one pen bought in 1993~ Vienna, 100% was purchased online.)

Hi LizEF,

 

Yes, I know; I don't understand it, myself... although I'm not fluent with European business models, politics and/or mindsets, (I have enough trouble keeping up with our own ), to figure out where they'd be coming from with this.

 

All we can do is hope... and there's always FPH in Manhattan and Anderson in Wisconsin; they should both be able to keep their accounts... if this is even the case... right now, all we have are speculations.

 

Oh, well; just hang on tight and keep smiling at the driver.

 

- Anthony

Edited June 2, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[pajaro]

  On 6/2/2017 at 8:32 PM, ParkerDuofold said:

Mmmmmmm.... ink and peanut butter.... my favorite combination.

 

- Anthony

I don't think "Jif" meant peanut butter in this case.

[LizEF]

Anthony, yeah, I suspect this is more worry than reality. Fortunately, I'm pretty content with my pen collection, and overwhelmed with ink samples I have yet to try, so I guess it'll be a while before I need to worry about shopping for more...

 

PS: ...though I am kinda curious about that Jinhao 992...

[ParkerDuofold]

  On 6/2/2017 at 9:54 PM, pajaro said:

I don't think "Jif" meant peanut butter in this case.

Hi Pajaro,

 

Neither do I; hence the wink in my signature. I'm glad to see you got the reference... and possibly, you're joking with me.

 

More than likely, it's the coachbuilder that built the truck's body. A case where beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.

 

- Anthony

Edited June 2, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[ParkerDuofold]

  On 6/2/2017 at 9:55 PM, LizEF said:

Anthony, yeah, I suspect this is more worry than reality. Fortunately, I'm pretty content with my pen collection, and overwhelmed with ink samples I have yet to try, so I guess it'll be a while before I need to worry about shopping for more...

 

PS: ...though I am kinda curious about that Jinhao 992...

 

Hi Liz, yeah; me too. I'm fairly content with what I have, too... or as close to it as any manic pen collector can get.

 

Ah, yes; the 992... along with that spine tingling photo essay of mine. I wish I could say I was drunk, but I was only really tired.

 

I even thought of doing a real review on that one, but I don't know if I want to go thru that again, (like the L2K); they take a lot of time and effort. The 992 is definitely a mixed bag, (as I'm finding out),... and like the Noodler's pens, it helps if you're a shadetree pen mechanic.

 

- Anthony

Edited June 3, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[Runnin_Ute]

  On 6/2/2017 at 3:56 PM, Cyber6 said:

 

 

Didn't Sailor dropped them too?... Can't remember why?.. It can't be because Sailor inks were not moving fast enough...

I seem to recall Sailor wanted dealers to carry whole line. Pens and inks.

[TSherbs]

Waterman inks? Who cares?

[Tinjapan]

I would think that even if a retailer did not sell a large volume that having more outlets for a product is better than fewer.

[jmccarty3]

Sure, Waterman inks are not the most exciting ones out there, but it would be a loss to the FP community of they went out of business. I still keep their blue and blue-black (green) around for my vintage pens. And I still write with an EF Waterman L'Etalon every day at the office. It's a shame they've allowed the brand to deteriorate so badly.

[PS104]

  On 6/3/2017 at 12:19 AM, TSherbs said:

Waterman inks? Who cares?

I care

It's a good ink. Very well-behaved and NOT oversaturated. It's a good workday ink

I agree. Changing the color names to these touchy-feely names was not a good idea. Probably the bright idea of some twenty-something suit trying to make his mark in the executive suite.

Aurora had two good inks. Black and blue. No one complained about them. They were, almost by default, practically 'standards' . Then they produced another color, viz, Blue Black which from reviews of it runs the gamut of yawn to snooze, Producing a new color every month is not going to raise your profit margin unless they're advertised as an LE.

​I agree with jmccarty3 that losing Waterman would be a loss to the fountain pen community.

Tomorrow I'm going to my B&M (Bertram's Inkwell) and get several bottles.