ladybug93 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 2:26 pm
weeping minora wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 2:07 pm
ladybug93 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 1:54 pm
weeping minora wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 1:45 pm
It sounds more like to me that all that is wanted by expressing this thread, is what already happens. K390 was introduced to replace ZDP-189, which had been around for nearly a decade and a half as a standard offering in the line-up. S110V has been around for over a decade now, as a standard offering. Every knife that sells well, always gets an upgraded steel, it just has to prove its worth, in time. Sprint runs happened every year in models that sold well, now they are replaced by dealer exclusives that still sell well; all offered in super steels. Is the Delica and Endura still around after 30 years because Spyderco makes a bulk of their sales in these ultra limited sprint and exclusive runs? How about the PM2... Millie? A bulk of sales have been thanks to these "bland" steels.
actually, that's not what this thread is about at all. this thread is about giving new designs a chance with better steels before discontinuing them due to low sales. my example was the rockjumper, which we've been told is not selling as well as expected. it looks like a great design, but i don't think it's getting a fair chance because there are other knives that are similar in "better" steels that are going to be chosen instead. i personally don't care for the handle on the delica, but i'd rather buy a delica wharncliffe in k390, 20cv, or a salt 2 wharncliffe in lc200n than a rockjumper in vg10. the point of this thread was not to just ask for better steels... it was to ask to give good designs a better chance at success before putting them out to pasture.
Spyderco are a business after all and they do make a bulk of their decisions based on financial stability and growth. If a design is a dud, or not worth the initial cost to the ELU, raising the price by adding more costly materials/investment will only further choke their profit.
Only thing I can propose to possibly combat this is to introduce a new model solely as a sprint run, so if their investment wasn't worth the juice squeezed, they wouldn't be so clogged in their production, or financial pipeline. Maybe how to do this would be to give up too much "behind the scenes" (prototyping) information to gauge interest and I'm not sure Spyderco would be comfortable in doing that, at this point.
but how do you judge if a design is a dud or if it fails because of the steel it's offered in? my point was that the delica has decades of attention and more steels available that are bolstering it's sales. the rockjumper is starting off having to fight for attention on both fronts. if it was offered in a steel that people that talk about knives would buy, they would buy it and talk about it and then more people would buy the vg10 version as well.
it's just a theory turned into an appeal to not disco good designs before trying something different. that's all.
I can make a darn good assessment based on how many of the folks here are expressing their uninterest in purchasing said model, based on their uninterest in the steel being offered. Regardless of merit, that shows an uninterest in the model, so much so as to become a dud and fail.
I believe a better question would be, how do we judge the majority of folk's buying habits, those who may not shell out the money for said model, who do not hold steel alone in such high regard as such being expressed here, to warrant their money spending decisions? Believe it or not, but money spending has become restricted for a majority of folks, reducing expenditures on wants, including untroddenly paved new pocket knives. I've seen many, many,
many more folks be adamantly brutal about the pricing of most Spyderco models being above and beyond their budgets anymore; so how do you propose to then
raise the price further, by adding a more costly steel to a knife already in competition with a lesser costly variant that is not selling well? I do not understand how a higher priced offering will somehow induce sales of the model to begin it's lifespan, to get more people talking about said model that may be on the brink of extinction due to a lack of outright sales, to then induce sales of a lower priced variant that refused to sell initially? What if, after said purchase, most don't feel the knife is worthy when compared and competing against the tried and true favorites already readily available in super steels? We're splitting hairs on most differences anymore and it's obvious that the vast majority only really care about the steel on offer in these more "afi" based models. An overwhelming bulk of real complaints I see/hear seem to come from the thought process of, "oh, another
overpriced plastic handled knife; China offers better fit and finish at 1/3 the price, get it together Slighterco!!", rather than, "oh, no k390? ahrd pass bro.". It must be remembered that the majority of sales come from those that we here on this forum will never see, nor hear opinion from, however there is certainly a rather negative, or overlooked outlook from the many in regards to much of the new Spyderco models over the passed few years.
I see your point, ladybug, yet I do not agree that this will ultimately boost sales for any model that is in as much fierce competition as you point out, on both fronts (newness and uninterestedness). I believe the pricing itself has the majority share in why these models are not selling well and why they eventually do not get the super steel treatment and eventually burn out. I know sal has made this quite clear over time that sales warrant the continuation of any model, so perhaps those afis who want, should give a bit more in order to get more? There are too many variables at play to put a finger on
exactly why knives do, or do not succeed; Maybe it's in an unfavorable lock mechanism? Maybe they look too similar to what's already being offered in Spyderco's lineup to justify another purchase of "the same knife"? Maybe the colors are too plain, or too common in their collection? Maybe the centering is too far off and is a sign that Spyderco doesn't care about their customer's purchase? Maybe it won't photograph well enough for Instagram? Maybe it doesn't look cool enough dangling in the pocket with the lackluster standard clip Spyderco decided to send out with such an overpriced knife that they can't stop regretting purchasing? Maybe it looks too funky while in the closed position resting on a table, or in a sock drawer, furthering the resentment that they spent their hard earned monies on a worthless, good for nothing, less than paperweight too trash for the bin product? Maybe a majority of the remaining knife buying community just don't use their knives much, if at all and are solely worried about further non-use, personal nitpicks for collecting and flipping purposes? The questions are countless as to why anyone won't make the purchase to invoke a better steel offering in any given new model. I'm sure all of that rhetoric factors in to the whole; however, raising the price if any of those factors are indeed at play, seems asinine reasoning to induce further sales, IMO.
Spyderco hit the nail on the head with their "Flash Batch" series of releases, IMO, yet that too has been shelved in favor of exclusive runs of steel and differing colored materials within the same old tried and true sellers. Maybe this format should be reserved for new models to gauge interest before a full and further commitment is released to market? Maybe consider all new models "Mules" and utilize the exact same formulated idea? Marketing is marketing and I say use whatever wording that will make the sales, but the concept sounds like it may shed greater value to increase interest. Everyone is afraid of missing out on the same old sh*t, so why not make everyone miss out on the brand new sh*t in the process, too? If all goes better than planned, start to release a few more limited runs until the interest has proven it's worth for the queue. Make everything new an "exclusive". That would surely stir the pond and get more to bite in today's economic climate.
I stand by my words for wanting better geometries offered on knives, regardless of steel, or model. If a super steel is offered in such a package, great, perhaps it will actually make them worth their super moniker, though my interest and sale is most likely lost due to cost. I would prefer a well heat-treated, mid-tier steel with excellent (thinner) geometry so the knife on offer itself will not be priced out of competition (or budget), thus allowing an amount of sales to make the juice worth the squeeze. Maybe this will be a factor to induce sales of new models, along with the proposed "better" steel out the gate; in conjunction. The performance Delica I suppose is a good start, however I'm not expecting anything out of that endeavor, because, "muh, VG-10". The Delica itself already has excellent geometry, so it's kind of a moot point. Pretty sure the millions of sales of Spyderco knives in the geometry that has been offered speaks for itself and my ask of opinion is certainly worthless to the winds of opposition for those in favor of just adding one more steel. Thus is life. I made a preferential suggestion, although my suggestion erred on the side of cost efficiency, as steel can be bought in different (thinner) thicknesses and the overall equipment and manpower would be lessened with easier to work with steels.
Maybe I'm just tired of hearing the clamor for a new dang steel in the same dang package and I'm expressing a different avenue of marketed value for consumers to eat up and someday get bored of, all the same, just as your original post is expressing, ladybug. It's late and I'm tired and this is the best, most honest response I can give. I can't keep up with all these posts and be able to give my expressed interest in the only, long-winded way I know how. I just seem to lose interest anymore as much of any conversation goes on here these days just circles around the same old, same old.
Some of my words have already been skewed to benefit those in opposition to my suggestions and I expect the same from this post. Remember, I'm not stealing anyone's dreams, nor wishes by making further suggestions so far out of left field, I expect nothing out of them from Spyderco, nor do I expect a piece of anyone else's lunch in the process. I suppose it customary to forthright apologize to those who aren't thick skinned enough to understand that these statements are my opinion, whose feathers are ruffled in the reading of my jargon, but I stand on the ground I've layed forth on this one (minus the slandering comments toward Spyderco, of which were made in jest based off of real life examination of what people will feel slighted about when buying Spyderco product and to add depth to my viewpoints). Sincere apologies to Spyderco and the Forum for breaching the "Shiny Footprints" motto abided by here, but sometimes things just don't "hit" (make sense), if sugarcoated. I'll be seeing my way out, as I'm not sure I have much to give to this forum at this point in time.
Thanx much for what you've created sal, Gail and I wish nothing but the best for Eric at the helm.
Make Knife Grinds Thin Again.
