High Quality MT vs PRICE

[Etherealicer]

Whenever there is a new MT, there is of course the discussion about the price. Most recently of course the price of the Center Drive. At 100$ people find this expensive and expect a flawless tool. I find that a bit strange especially in relation to Knife and OPT prices. We are also more than willing to pay twice the price for an orange Cadet, but moan about the silver Cadet prices.

Why are we so willing to pay 60$ for a Delica 4, or twice that much for a Paramilitary 2. We see 30$ for a Buck 110 as a good price (Current Walmart deal). But then we are not willing to pay 150-200$ or even more for a quality MT!
I mean when I compare a Wave to a Buck 110, then that is at least worth 4 times as much for the 4 outside blades alone. Add in the pliers head and the small tools and we should end up at a price 5-6 times that of a Buck 110. But if LM actually sold the Wave at that price people would freak out.

I do have a Spyderco Native 5 that is more expensive than any MT I own (In Switzerland it is almost 3x the price of a Surge). And I have to say it is not worth it. So, it always bewilders me that people think that 100$ for an MT is a lot.

I guess my questions are:
Why are we willing to pay more for a knife than for an MT?
Would you be willing to pay 200$ for an upgraded/premium tool (e.g. a titanium Spirit-a-like with blade-exchanger and bit holder and textured frame for better grip)?
How about 300$?
Are we hindering the evolution of/production of premium MT with our unwillingness to pay for the it?

P.S.: Prices are for the US and while they are much higher in other places, commonly MT prices scale similarly to knife and OPT prices. This is not about paying 200$ in country X for a tool that costs 50$ in the US, but about MTs that cost 200+$ in the US.

[dks]

I was thinking along the same lines too.

a $15 traditional knife is a cheap disposable knife, whereas the $15 Gerber dime is expected to be perfect.

Traditional knives, from GEC start at around $50, but we expect multitools to be perfect at that price.
A Sebenza is OK at $400 but a Swisstool, with very good machining, the sebenza of multitools, if you like, is expensive at $160.....


Maybe because they are seen as tools, rather than something you love, something with a soul, something to show off to people.

Maybe people will not pay any more - knives are just overpriced?

[Don Pablo]

But here, we all know that SAK's have a soul.   

[chrono]

I think aesthetic, history, and brand name prestige have more play in people's willingness to pay than material. You will see even greater disparity when it comes to discontinued stuffs.

For me, I like the SOG's multi tool approach: I want to be able to customize my tool to my liking without going the DIY mod route. This way, manufacturers can sell premium components separately without losing customer base. Unfortunately, SOG multi designs are not the best in the business, and they do not offer premium tool components. I recently bought a SOG Arcitech knife with a beautiful Damascus blade. Don't know why SOG do not offer that kind of steel as PE blades on their multis.

[magentus]

Maybe it's because a knife is a single function tool and you can buy a really good quality one for very little cash. You can also pay the earth for one but it won't do any more than the Mora everyone has.

A multitool has a lot more to live up to and a cheap one won't perform at all well, whereas an expensive one will at least do nearly as well as its dedicated counterpart.

Interesting topic!

[firiki]

Good thread

Some knives are definitely overpriced IMO and I won't even talk about OPTs.

There are a few reasons that, I think, make people pay more for knives than for MTs:

First, there's looks. Many people will pay extra for pretty/mean/tacticool looks, often at the expense of ease of use.

A good knife is expected to last for a very long time if used and cared for appropriately and sometimes you do get what you pay for. In contrast, a MT, a compromise already, is liable to abuse and failure, and is often not serviceable be the user. These factors weight in on the amount of money one is willing to spend on such an item.

Personally, I wouldn't go much higher than $200 for a MT (or knife for that matter). The reason is simple, I can't afford to break/lose 'em. Even if I could, my uses don't justify such cost. What I want is good quality that provides value for money. In that aspect, my Vic Spirit and Pioneer win hands down and they didn't break the bank.

Having said all that, I think that if some company made a well designed, highly functional M, with tight manufacture tolerances and impressive specs, then that company would create a market for that tool. Would it be cost effective? I can't tell. It probably would be, if the right deals were struck.

[Sea Monster]

To your question, in short "I'm Not"


As you say, US Knives scale the same as US Multitools - Which is why I don't buy them (certainly not new anyway!)

I am more than happy to pay a "comparable" price for my multi tools (I work off the quality of my other tools moreso than off my knives)

but - I have choices with my (regular)tools and knives - I can buy German, Japanese, Spanish, Swedish, (Swiss  ) - And they all give me better bang for my buck...


I have less choices with Multis - Which (fairly or unfairly) puts the likes of Gerber, LM & SOG at a disadvantage trying to impress me. They have to meet both the quality and affordability of their competitors, with all of the nuances of the market as they are.


All things being equal, USD vs USD, if I was living in the US, I would happily pay the (street, if not MSRP) cost of the majority of LMs, Gerbers and Sogs, and probably have a nice cache of Buck knives as well.


A Multi however puts itself in a difficult spot by being, well, multi.

The screwdriver has to be able to compete with my $20 Screwdriver.
The pliers have to be able to compete with my $60 Pliers.
The Blade has to be able to compete with my $60 knife.
The scissors have to be able to compete with my $20 scissors.
The saw has to be able to compete with my $40 saw.

but all of a sudden $200 seems like a big investment in a pocket tool, that realistically doesn't do any of those things as well.

(The above prices are reasonable estimations of good quality professional tools, and a LM Wave)

knives are just overpriced?

I blame the saturation of "cheap" knives on the market, every time a Knife maker loses a sale to a...lesser quality product, they have to up the margin on the remaining sales to stay afloat.. (turning more people to buy cheapies, and the cycle continues)

[Demel]

Good topic

Simple take. If there is any multi that's worth $100+ on the market today it's the Swisstool and the Spirit. I have a charge that I paid just under $100 for and modded to preference. I would have gladly paid $100+ to get the configuration stock. I'm with firiki: anything over $200 for any knife or tool is too much. At that point the price/value ratio goes out the window.

Again Vic really is the only manufacturer that makes a quality multi that has the specs of a expensive multi. Their precision is legendary. Leatherman can do the same, they just don't. And Gerber should start milking their MP series. Offer customizable mp packages. And SOG...oh SOG....if they can get some quality internal components they could really go head to head or even knock Leatherman off their throne. But SOG produces off shore so not sure if that'll happen. I guess all that to say I would be willing to pay up for a top notch tool, I just expect top notch quality.

The other factor is companies want their tools in people's hands. The higher the price tag it starts pushing people away.

[dks]

http://www.atwoodknives.com/


some multitools are expensive, if they are limited edition, hand made, desirable, especially on the secondary market. 
Atwood.... a nice quality single piece multitool that can go for silly money.

[irona]

My guess is that is has to do with expecting a knife to be made with flawless top of the line material and craftsmanship, and that we view MTs as generally having less than the pinnacle of metallurgy technology put into them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Etherealicer]

My guess is that is has to do with expecting a knife to be made with flawless top of the line material and craftsmanship, and that we view MTs as generally having less than the pinnacle of metallurgy technology put into them

Yeah but that is exactly the point

At the end of the day a knife has much fewer parts, so it is easier to have a "flawless" product, yet we expect less AND pay more for it.
But think what Victorinox could do if its customers were willing to pay 500$ for a SwissTool DELUX!

[Etherealicer]

[...]
A good knife is expected to last for a very long time if used and cared for appropriately and sometimes you do get what you pay for. In contrast, a MT, a compromise already, is liable to abuse and failure, and is often not serviceable be the user. These factors weight in on the amount of money one is willing to spend on such an item.
[...]

Any tool will break with heavy use, yet we still pay 20$ for a screwdriver.
Would you be willing to pay more, if it were easier to replace broken parts? I would. So clearly it is not just a customer problem, but a problem of the whole market.

I think that is why the Signal is a stroke of genius, not in quality/design, but marketing wise. LM changed its customer base to a group of people more willing to pay a bit more and less likely to break it (that also means less warranty claims).

[metasyntax]

Whenever there is a new MT, there is of course the discussion about the price. Most recently of course the price of the Center Drive. At 100$ people find this expensive and expect a flawless tool. I find that a bit strange especially in relation to Knife and OPT prices.

I rarely pay over $100 for any tool, even collectible pieces. A hundred bucks is about my limit for any knife, light, watch, or multi. I feel like most things over that price are either (1) higher quality than I need, or (2) less value than I demand. Now, it varies a little with the product of course, but I think it's a good generalization that you get a good quality whatever for $100, across the board. Victorinox Spirit, Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight, Casio GW-M5610, ZebraLight SC62 — these are among my favorite things, and I got them all around $80. These items are all good quality and perform well, and I believe they represent good value.

Relatedly, my reservations about spending $100 for a Center Drive are not because of comparing it against knife prices, but against other MT prices. You can get a Spirit for $100. For me, the Center Drive doesn't offering anything over the Spirit in terms of features, so to be a good value, it should have quality comparable to the Spirit. I doubt that it will.

There's clearly a market for "high end" knives (titanium, carbon fiber, CTS-204P), watches (titanium, sapphire, fully jeweled, HAQ), even lights (rotary switches, multi-emitter monsters)... but not for multi-tools. I would say the reason for this is because out of all four, MTs are considered the most "workingest" of all... not many people consider multi-tools as art, or buy customs. There are a lot more people who buy fancy watches or knives... maybe even flashlights. I might be wrong, and it's an untapped market, but I think it's low demand that's preventing high end MT options.

[Poncho65]

I try to get a MT, SAK, knife or tool as cheap of a price as I can without sacrificing quality I am always looking at deals and that is why I don't have some of the higher end MTs or knives Ido occasionally luck up and find them for a price I am willing to give though

But on the other hand if it is an occasion (or I have money from said occasion ) I am willing to give more for any of the above (within reason )

I don't expect things to be perfect or flawless maybe as much as some though and can look past things (especially second hand goods) but I do look for it to function the way it is intended

[Poncho65]

Whenever there is a new MT, there is of course the discussion about the price. Most recently of course the price of the Center Drive. At 100$ people find this expensive and expect a flawless tool. I find that a bit strange especially in relation to Knife and OPT prices.

I rarely pay over $100 for any tool, even collectible pieces. A hundred bucks is about my limit for any knife, light, watch, or multi. I feel like most things over that price are either (1) higher quality than I need, or (2) less value than I demand. Now, it varies a little with the product of course, but I think it's a good generalization that you get a good quality whatever for $100, across the board. Victorinox Spirit, Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight, Casio GW-M5610, ZebraLight SC62 — these are among my favorite things, and I got them all around $80. These items are all good quality and perform well, and I believe they represent good value.

Relatedly, my reservations about spending $100 for a Center Drive are not because of comparing it against knife prices, but against other MT prices. You can get a Spirit for $100. For me, the Center Drive doesn't offering anything over the Spirit in terms of features, so to be a good value, it should have quality comparable to the Spirit. I doubt that it will.

There's clearly a market for "high end" knives (titanium, carbon fiber, CTS-204P), watches (titanium, sapphire, fully jeweled, HAQ), even lights (rotary switches, multi-emitter monsters)... but not for multi-tools. I would say the reason for this is because out of all four, MTs are considered the most "workingest" of all... not many people consider multi-tools as art, or buy customs. There are a lot more people who buy fancy watches or knives... maybe even flashlights. I might be wrong, and it's an untapped market, but I think it's low demand that's preventing high end MT options.

I agree with this price limit on my stuff as well

[SteveC]

 

[Don Pablo]

I've never spent over 30 eur on any knife or multitool.
But thats because I'm not fully lost in here yet.   
I don't even keep TWO eyes out looking for SAKs when at flea markets/car boot sales/anywhere really. 

[G-Dizzle]

My first leatherman was a Charge TTI..... so yeah.... my thinking has evolved since then though

[Dalton Siedschlag]

The center drive is coming from a company that in its current state is quite questionable in terms of quality. On Gerber's website I was unable to find details on materials so that raises a red flag for many. Another reason is tool set and innovations which are both quite minimal. I think the center drive may go the way of the tread by leatherman, really cool but not worth it.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Etherealicer]

Victorinox Spirit, Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight, Casio GW-M5610, ZebraLight SC62 — these are among my favorite things, and I got them all around $80. These items are all good quality and perform well, and I believe they represent good value.

This is sorta my point: The Manix looks like a nice folder but it does not nearly offer as much as a Spirit, it is much easier to build. Yet, we (its not just you) are all willing to pay that.

Seriously, if you had no idea about knife/MT prices would you put the same price tag on both?

If I compare my Native 5 G-10 to the Spirit, then I would call it  a crude, simple instrument, made of good materials. And while it holds the edge better it does not outperform the Spirit in just any cutting task (the wide blade is rather poor for slicing). It's not even without flaw. The pocket clip is cheap and bent out of shape within the first week. And for only one function, it weights 2/3rd of the Spirit.

So, simply based on what you get, a good quality knife, I would price my Spyderco Native 5 at about a 3rd of a Spirit. In reality the pricing is the other way round, the Native costs about 70% more*.
Actually, this made me feel stupid a while ago and I decided that I won't be paying that much for a knife anymore (ok, I still have my eyes on a Fällkniven and the Swiss Border Guard knife ).

All this makes me think that producing quality MTs is not as profitable as making knives (less units sold, less profit per unit). This makes it a though market and that means manufacturers can't take risks (ask Wenger about it). That is why there is less innovation and less variation.
Victorinox has started to remedy this at least in part, with the annual damascene model and the colored alox models. LM had limited runs of colored Waves (and others). I'm sort of surprised this is not done more.
I mean a carbon-fiber / G-10 Charge would not require much change. Why not make a Salt Wave (that I would buy for the name alone ) with H1 blades and better rust-proofing (brightly yellow coated frame). Of course that would require that people buy it and are willing to pay for it.

*Prices on Amazon:
Native 5 G-10 130$
Spirit 75-100$

 

[dks]

they are more adventurous with colours on their cheaper multitools, like the squirt, Juice, Micra

[Etherealicer]

they are more adventurous with colours on their cheaper multitools, like the squirt, Juice, Micra

Yes, and look at the Vic Classic with a kazillion variation... no wonder it sells 20 mio times every year.

[AimlessWanderer]

I have spent good money on more expensive options, only to be frustrated. I have also bought cheaper items and been disappointed by them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but in many ways, quality is in the eye of the beholder too. How many have griped at a Spirit because it doesn't cut stranded wire cleanly, or doesn't sit flat on a table. Many think the Rebar is a high quality tool, but I have tried it twice and can't see the merits through the fog of it's failings. We do not all value tools the same way.

However, I will say that more people can see the value of a good knife, than can see the value of a good multitool. Knives have a more universal appeal in that way. I think most people only discover a multitool's merits after they have lived with one, and saved the day with one. A pocket flashlight is the same. Folks generally have a more instinctive appreciation for a pocket knife.

[Padre]

Knives are good in what they are doing, MTs are known for being bad in what they are doing. I guess thats the thing. I just enjoy using MT and its usually enough for my needs and helps with my life and work. For me its the fun factor that counts, and using MTs lets my inner MacGyver shine. I'm not much into expensive knives either, had some customs, had some midtechs, but really after around $350-400 they are not worth it anymore. You could get smoother action and exotic materials but as a tool they wont differ from $350 knife.
This might change in the future, but right now its easy to say that an 100 knife is worse than 200 knife. Everyone knows that the 200 one isnt really worth double the price, but its still really easy to tell the difference. At 300 you still get better product, but at this point its not so clear anymore. For example my beater ZT0452CF is miles away from my PM2, but I wouldnt say that its SO MUCH better that I absolutely need it. After you have tasted quality its just hard to forget. Same goes with MTs.

[Gerhard Gerber]

Good topic, made me think because you are spot-on...... 

Close as I could figure out for myself, knives are the First Tool, and as such holds a deep fascination for many to the extent you get ceremonial and art knives.

Multi tools are just.......tools.
Even a special edition with a Damascus blade that looks very pretty still has a screwdriver and bottle/can opener, no way to make those look sexy, even if they are in Damascus.

[WoodsDuck]

Good topic, made me think because you are spot-on...... 

Close as I could figure out for myself, knives are the First Tool, and as such holds a deep fascination for many to the extent you get ceremonial and art knives.

Multi tools are just.......tools.
Even a special edition with a Damascus blade that looks very pretty still has a screwdriver and bottle/can opener, no way to make those look sexy, even if they are in Damascus.

Your post inspired me to google "sexy screwdriver." I have mixed feelings about the results.

[Etherealicer]

Good topic, made me think because you are spot-on...... 

Close as I could figure out for myself, knives are the First Tool, and as such holds a deep fascination for many to the extent you get ceremonial and art knives.

Multi tools are just.......tools.
Even a special edition with a Damascus blade that looks very pretty still has a screwdriver and bottle/can opener, no way to make those look sexy, even if they are in Damascus.

Your post inspired me to google "sexy screwdriver." I have mixed feelings about the results.

Innocent as I am, I presume lots of pictures of the Doctors Sonic Screwdriver

[firiki]

[...]
A good knife is expected to last for a very long time if used and cared for appropriately and sometimes you do get what you pay for. In contrast, a MT, a compromise already, is liable to abuse and failure, and is often not serviceable be the user. These factors weight in on the amount of money one is willing to spend on such an item.
[...]

Any tool will break with heavy use, yet we still pay 20$ for a screwdriver.
Would you be willing to pay more, if it were easier to replace broken parts? I would. So clearly it is not just a customer problem, but a problem of the whole market.

I think that is why the Signal is a stroke of genius, not in quality/design, but marketing wise. LM changed its customer base to a group of people more willing to pay a bit more and less likely to break it (that also means less warranty claims).

Maybe, but that's just a probability -because I prefer rivets and can't really do them myself- and the tool would have to be both pretty well made (as far as design and materials are concerned) and also reasonably priced too. What's reasonable is debatable, though. Still, I'd prefer paying up for the ease of replacing the parts when the need arose, not beforehand.

Marketing plays an important role in pricing and of course manufacturers try to make the most money possible out of every piece they sell and competition is tough. I did pay good money for dedicated tools that will be more than up to my casual use, this has provided my with exceptional value for my needs.

I can't say I'd do the same for a knife or MT. As I said already, I want good quality (not basic, mind you) out of these items but I don't think much is gained in terms of performance as you pay more for a knife or MT past a certain point.

To address your last question in the OP:

Are we hindering the evolution of/production of premium MT with our unwillingness to pay for the it?

 

Yes, probably, but a company's research funds aren't (shouldn't be) my concern. Also, when you say premium, do you mean exclusive or of super duper great quality? My personal buying attitude is to try and buy the best that suits my needs without cheaping out but without splurging either. So in the case of a super duper, nearly indestructible MT I'd probably consider getting one if possible. For a knife, I wouldn't.

What is meant by "LM changed its customer base to a group of people more willing to pay a bit more and less likely to break it"?

[Etherealicer]

What is meant by "LM changed its customer base to a group of people more willing to pay a bit more and less likely to break it"?

Well MT in general address the craftsman / jack of all trades / maintenance guys. And sometimes you make it work with what you have (use the blade as screwdriver or pry-tool).

The signal is directed at the outdoors-crowd. Next to the titanium canteen, trekking shoes, Fällkniven A1Pro and the handpresso machine, the Signal does not appear to be expensive anymore. And when you mostly use it to make a pointy stick to roast marshmallows, dangers of it breaking is far less. Also going outdoors / trekking / camping is a hobby and people usually question expenses on their hobby less.

Basically, the average MT is aimed for work, while the Signal is designed for fun / leisure / hobby.

[Etherealicer]

Yes, probably, but a company's research funds aren't (shouldn't be) my concern. Also, when you say premium, do you mean exclusive or of super duper great quality? My personal buying attitude is to try and buy the best that suits my needs without cheaping out but without splurging either. So in the case of a super duper, nearly indestructible MT I'd probably consider getting one if possible. For a knife, I wouldn't.

Its not your concern but it also means that you won't get anything new.

I mean everything
Salsmurfer proof diving MT in H1 steel
Ultralight made of titanium and carbon nano-tubules
Modular MT with the tolerance and quality of a Spirit
Whatever you desire

But for the basics. Many people complain that some tools don't have the quality anymore they used to have. We mostly blame it on production in China, but the truth is that we pay far less for a similar tool than 20 years ago and therefore should not be surprised that quality has dwindled.