Modern Design and Production

[Grant Lamontagne]

I wrote this as a blog post for the Main Site and decided I should maybe post it here as well.  I've had this discussion with a lot of well meaning designers who are headed straight for one pitfall or another, and I probably should just make it public.  As with anything else, it is well open for discussion, so feel free to comment as you see fit! 

Modern Design and Production

There are a lot of designers out there, and that's a good thing.  Design software and the machines powerful enough to run it are available to pretty well anyone these days for very little cost, and 3D printers have revolutionized limited production and rapid prototyping, and sites like Kickstarter, Gofundme and Indigogo have made it possible for people to get the startup capitol they need to launch their revolutionary new product to turn the world on it's ear.  But, those aren't the only changes you need to know about.

Thirty years ago, when you had a new product design you were limited to working on it on weekends and evenings in the garage, with whatever tools and materials you could lay your hands on.  There was a lot less product testing, and product mortality rate was high.  Very few of these ideas became reality either due to limited markets, limited functionality or marketability, not being able to find a suitable or affordable manufacturing process or simply because the inventors just gave up.

When ideas did succeed they were often owned in whole or in part by the company that took the risk off your hands, taking over production, marketing and distribution, and often made changes to your initial design in order to increase it's chances of success, even if this wasn't true to the inventor's initial vision.

Today, with an entire planet's worth of manufacturers waiting to quote on any job, no matter how big or how small, regardless of whether it is an individual or a mega-corp, and the tools (hardware and software) being more accessible than ever, we are seeing an astounding number of products on the market- some good, some not so much.  Regardless of the usefulness of the item, I consider this a good thing, as it gives us access to items that may not have been seen otherwise- after all, “limited function” doesn't mean “useless” and there are bound to be people somewhere in the world that do need what you have developed, even if it isn't something that will fly off the shelves at a local Big Box Store,

Like anything else, this advancement comes at a price, and if you aren't keeping it in mind, that price may end up ruining you.

I am not a lawyer, and what I am saying does not constitute legal advice, and it may vary greatly on your situation.  I am speaking about generalities that may or may not apply, but it is valuable for you to read the following and make up your own mind about it.

Assume the above situation- you have worked hard to develop a product, sunk a lot of time and a reasonable amount of money into development, and you are ready to go ahead with manufacturing.  Your plan is to set the world on it's ear with your revolutionary design and retire off the residuals and continual sales that pour in year after year.

If that's your plan, congratulations, you have wasted your time and money and you should probably start shopping for a nice refrigerator box to live in, because here's how it plays out in the modern world.

You aren't an idiot, so you patent your idea before you start production.  Even if you aren't ready to produce it right away, you need to get your patent in before someone else thinks up the same thing- after all, patent protection kept Poloroid in business and virtually competition free for 50 years, right?

While waiting for patent lawyers to do their research you start looking into manufacturing your design and possibly a bit of refinement while you are at it.  You make sure to get confidentiality agreements from various manufacturers before you send them your design, because again, you aren't stupid, and you need to protect your intellectual property.

You even find a decent manufacturer at a decent price, and start to have an initial run of products done- we've all seen an item stamped “PATENT PENDING” and that is usually put on a product that is produced before the item is actually issued a patent, so as not to waste time.  No one will steal your idea if they figure the impending patent will keep them from actually using it.

Finally you start distribution, and for many folks that is their own website, Etsy or eBay, all of which are viable places to get a new business off the ground.  And then you find out your beloved project is already for sale at a fraction of what you were going to charge for it.

How did that happen?  You were smart, you were careful, and now you have an awful lot of savings and credit card debt taking up space in your garage, with little to no way to recoup it!

In this case, your patent application sunk you- patents are public, and often contain exact schematics of your item, especially nowadays when you are likely to submit a 3D rendering from the software you used to design it.  Some manufacturers in some countries (not pointing fingers here) scan patent organizations worldwide daily for new designs, and have the ability to manufacture items quickly and cheaply.  As the patent isn't worth the paper it is printed on to them, they are free to manufacture and sell your item, knowing full well that even if the patent did matter, you could never afford to enforce it.

And the time you spent refining and manufacturing, setting up advertising and promotion is worse than a waste, because now people are aware of your product, and many will go to eBay and buy it there for $2.99 instead of from you at $19.99. 

The bottom line is, you gave them your design specs and took longer to produce a product than they did, and then you paid to promote them.  You will be lucky to sell a few products, then liquidate the rest for pennies on the dollar as scrap.

There's another common scenario as well, that also leaves you high an dry that you need to watch out for, and it goes like this:

You develop your product and launch a crowdfunding campaign that is highly successful and you make whatever goal (and then some) and you contract a not-so-scruplulous company to produce the item for you so you can make your initial order of 10,000 units that makes the whole thing economically feasible. 

Great.

Except that your manufacturer makes 15,000 or 20,000 units, sends you your ten thousand and then sells the rest through their usual channels for a fraction of what you were going to, because you still need to make a profit, but they have already made their money off you, and whatever they can get selling your product (often even with your markings on it!) is pure gravy. 

And the worst part?  They aren't cheap knock-offs, because they were made on the same assembly line, using the same labor, components and materials yours is.  The cost to leave the assembly line running a bit longer is negligible to them.  And, they have begun selling it while you were waiting on delivery. 

Once again, you have handed your design over for the purpose of putting yourself out of business.

So how do you beat them at the game?  It's possible to win long term, but it may not be worth the effort.  There is however a way to put your effort to better use and come out ahead.  There are many ways, but in my experience, this is the most effective.

Don't be a one hit wonder.

Design your product, find the most trustworthy manufacturer you can, make a splash, get as much product sold in one year as you can.  Get it out, get that initial run sold as quickly as you can, make as much as you can off it, then drop it.  Keep the design listed on your website to sell off remaining stock, and remember that you can always order more as needed.  Then get on to the next design and repeat the above.  Don't expect residual sales after the initial rush because there's probably already someone doing it cheaper than you.

The upside to this is that people may buy last year's product while ordering this year's and so on, but as long as the initial run is paid for and a reasonable profit is made, those items sitting on the shelf are bonus.  They can sit, or they can move, even heavily discounted and you are still in the black.

It's not a good game, it's not a bad game, it's just a different game now than it was 30 years ago.  If you play your cards right, there's every chance you can win, but with any gamble, don't stick out any more than you are willing to lose.

Def

[ThePeacent]

Very very nice reading and quite an advice for those looking to improve the world around them, which unfortunately is darker and colder in this regard than it was ever before.

Liked that essaya lot, boss 

[Grant Lamontagne]

Very very nice reading and quite an advice for those looking to improve the world around them, which unfortunately is darker and colder in this regard than it was ever before.

Liked that essaya lot, boss 

I'm not sure if it's a darker world, it's just different from the days of the Pet Rock.  There may be a lot more predators out there, but there's also a lot more opportunity than there ever was before.  Imagine if Kickstarter was around in the early 80's when Tim Leatherman was trying to get his Mr. Crunch made? 

Def

[Kampfer]

Does one really expect a patent can protect his OPMT design? It is just a piece of sheet metal cut out cleverly. 

[AimlessWanderer]

My biggest issue with modern offerings is the motivation. Previously, back in the earlier days of pliers based tools, the motivation was to try and make the best tools. These days the top two criteria on the design brief are for the offering to be saleable and profitable.

Tool manufacturers and designers, big and small, are no longer trying to produce good tools - they're simply trying to come up with something new to sell. The function and quality of the product is secondary at best. As a result the products they dangle under our noses today are compromised often to the point of being useless, or at least well below the standard that serious tool users need.

Wrought materials with superior grain structures are giving way to investment casting. Outsourced components come from the lowest bidder. Everything is being done at every stage to reduce the cost while still "looking" like a proper tool - "functioning" like a proper tool is no longer a consideration - they're no longer tools, just affordable Christmas and birthday gifts, consumer items to fill shelves and win large supply contracts.

Realistically, when was the last time a multitool came out, where we all thought it looked like a piece of serious hard use gear, and wasn't compromised in construction just to get the price tag down and profit margin up?

[Grant Lamontagne]

Realistically, when was the last time a multitool came out, where we all thought it looked like a piece of serious hard use gear, and wasn't compromised in construction just to get the price tag down and profit margin up?

This is a whole other discussion, and absolutely accurate.

The reason we don't see as many tool variations is this- multitools cost too bloody much.

Think about it this way- you take a fancy tactical folder, which has maybe two moving parts- the blade and lock bar.  You rearrange a few things, add some fancy material, and BOOM!  $250.

Then you take a relatively simple multitool, which has a moving plier head, two rotating handles and four rotating functions inside each, along with a lock mechanism on either side for a total of roughly 13 moving parts.  And, if your tool is over $75, it will be a hard sell.  Only Leatherman has been successful in beating the $100 barrier.

Now remember that these are likely to be used harder and abused more than any tactical type pocket knife, since the pretty knives go away and the multitools come out when you get to the hard jobs, which means you need to make them as solid as you can or else you will get a reputation for making crap.

So, you need to make a relatively complex product with a very limited budget and next to no markup, or you can make a comparatively simple product with a profit margin the size of the Grand Canyon.

Which product are you likely to put your best designers on?

As for the influx of crappy one piece tools, I blame that squarely on Mr. Peter Atwood.  I am not suggesting that Atwood stuff is crap.  Not in the slightest, but he single handedly created a market that a bunch of people, including the no talent fops, decided to get into.  And, as the one piece phenomena became a "thing" then more people got involved, and even those with absolutely no talent or ability are being successful.

For that particular market segment, evolution has failed us.

Def

[AimlessWanderer]

I almost agree, but feel the need to be pedantic here....

It's not that multitools cost too much, but that the vast majority of users aren't prepared to pay for quality. I don't think swamping the market with investment cast tool substitutes helps matters either. The knive market started out the same way with price being king, and everyone striving to undercut the next man, or find ways to justify why theirs was a few notes more. It took people to take risks and try to build a reputation for higher quality at higher prices, people such as Chris Reeves, to shift the market mentality into being prepared to pay extra for something better.

That perspective shift is yet to happen with multitools. People will pay 50 notes for a good set of pliers, 50 notes for a half decent knife, 30 notes for a set of decent screwdrivers, but baulk at 80 notes for one tool which combines the lot, adds in a saw file and scissors for good measure, and even has a belt sheath to carry it in. It's not the price that's out of whack, it's the perspective of what is realistic pricing.

Unfortunately, I don't think the market is quite sick enough of the compromises they're being fed yet to sustainably demand that toolmakers start offering the "new wave" of proper hard use tools. Maybe there's space in the market for one small maker to cater for the few people that are prepared to pay for quality, but I think most folks still see 50 notes as expensive, even though they pay over 100 for a folding knife on it's own.

We need an awakening, but I don't think the time is right yet.

[metasyntax]

It's not that multitools cost too much, but that the vast majority of users aren't prepared to pay for quality. I don't think swamping the market with investment cast tool substitutes helps matters either. The knive market started out the same way with price being king, and everyone striving to undercut the next man, or find ways to justify why theirs was a few notes more. It took people to take risks and try to build a reputation for higher quality at higher prices, people such as Chris Reeves, to shift the market mentality into being prepared to pay extra for something better.

That perspective shift is yet to happen with multitools. People will pay 50 notes for a good set of pliers, 50 notes for a half decent knife, 30 notes for a set of decent screwdrivers, but baulk at 80 notes for one tool which combines the lot, adds in a saw file and scissors for good measure, and even has a belt sheath to carry it in. It's not the price that's out of whack, it's the perspective of what is realistic pricing.

Unfortunately, I don't think the market is quite sick enough of the compromises they're being fed yet to sustainably demand that toolmakers start offering the "new wave" of proper hard use tools. Maybe there's space in the market for one small maker to cater for the few people that are prepared to pay for quality, but I think most folks still see 50 notes as expensive, even though they pay over 100 for a folding knife on it's own.

Reminds me of this thread: http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,69210.0.html

I was going to say that I'm perfectly happy with the compromises we have, and that I wouldn't buy a $300 multi-tool even if they did exist. But then I remembered that a rising tide lifts all boats.

[Grant Lamontagne]

You are both absolutely correct, and I really can't argue with you, but maybe a high priced tool is defeating the purpose of the tool?

The reason the fancy $350 Sebenza gets put away when you are cutting an zip tie off a greasy, tar covered pipe and the multitool comes out is because it is meant for dirty work, and it's price reflects that.

Would someone be as cavalier about using the damascus saw on a $280 carbon fiber with MOP inlaid handled Leatherman to hack away at an old clogged up PVC poo chute? 

Probably not.

You aren't going to yank the plug out of a oil pan with a $400 Diamond Edition Gerber MP600 with genuine Swarovski crystal embedded in the plier pivot, or assemble your children's toys on Christmas with a micarta and titanium version of the ZillaTool, so why would the manufacturers put them out?  Multitools are meant to be abused, and no one wants to abuse something nice.

Def

[dks]

as a wise man once said:

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?

[dks]

...and someone did come here, a few years ago, with the best multitool ever, but, nobody here was able to comprehend the level of greatness of that tool.......  we broke his heart....

We only have ourselves to blame 

[AimlessWanderer]

 

The other aspect I think is that because a knife is such a simple tool, it is a lot easier for it to be a perfect fit for someone. With a multitool, it's not just a matter of fit or looks, but also of tool set. People aren't going to pay 250 notes for a tool which doesn't even have scissors, or diamond file, or has the wrong type of saw teeth, or wrong driver combination, or wrong awl geometry, or pocket clip in the wrong place, never mind is/isn't sprung, or does/doesn't have replacable cutters, the list goes on....... the more features a tool has, the more chance of there being a feature that doesn't suit the needs of the individual

[Grant Lamontagne]

For $250 it better make me breakfast too....

But then I've said the exact same things about knives, and the only knife I've ever bought that cost anywhere near that was a gift for someone else.

And DKS- yes, you said that a while ago but you are so far ahead of the curve that it's taken the rest of us this long to catch up.  You can't hold us accou b table for being inferior specimens....

Def

[dks]

...that is why I often have to repeat myself.

...anybody wanting a speciment sample, call me .

[Gerhard Gerber]

I'm guessing those scenarios are based (loosely or otherwise) on real experiences?

I would not be surprised......

Considering all this, would it be safe to say it's very unlikely a new giant will arise in the multitool market, and we're stuck with the reboots and sales gimmicks of the existing players?

Will the next big evolution of the multitool be closer to Dr Who's sonic screwdriver before there's a gap in the market again?

[Grant Lamontagne]

I'm guessing those scenarios are based (loosely or otherwise) on real experiences?

I would not be surprised......

Considering all this, would it be safe to say it's very unlikely a new giant will arise in the multitool market, and we're stuck with the reboots and sales gimmicks of the existing players?

Will the next big evolution of the multitool be closer to Dr Who's sonic screwdriver before there's a gap in the market again?

It's difficult to say.  The big companies are the big companes because they are established. If one were to follow my advice and release product after product, eventually they too would be established.  Look at Peter Atwood as an example of that.  Whether you have any of his tools, everyone knows who he is and what his products look like, and he did exactly that.  Mind you, his tools also qualify as art as well as function, and that certainly helps with his continued success.

Once you have a foothold, a beachhead, a presence, a customer base, whatever you want to call it, then the rules change slightly as your brand then becomes worth paying a little extra for.  Who here would rather pay $50 for a Leatherman PST than $20 for a cheapo LM knockoff?

But, the folks I have this conversation with are often new and trying to make that one product that is going to give them ultimate financial freedom, the one thing that everyone needs and has to have, and it just doesn't work that way.  Even the Home Run ideas still had to evolve with the times, or we'd all still be using Commodore 64's and shaving with one of these:



What people don't realize, like that particular gentleman that introduced us to the best multitool ever, is that this is a very crowded industry since it is so (relatively) easy to get into.  And, it's easy to get caught up in your own design, but that groups like this are here to help, and the suggestions are just that- suggestions.  No one is forcing you to make the changes we suggest.  If you need a device that functions a specific way, maybe someone else does too, and maybe that is a segment of people that don't frequent forums. 

But, you should also realize that this forum has seen some significant results, including several "coincidental" new models from one particular Oregon based company who I shan't name, changes to existing models and new models put in production on the suggestion of this site and one of our members having their design produced by a major manufacturer.  We've been down these roads many times before, and I certainly am not suggesting that one can't make a go of it the hard way, I'm asking why would they want to, when the "easy way" has enough challenges already? 

As far as I'm concerned, a rising tide raises all ships- the more we help members reach successful goals, the better it works out for this forum and it's community.  I have no desire to see anyone fail (well, maybe one but he's doing well enough on that road himself without my help ) and I am willing to help anyone with the experience I've gained over the years.

All you have to do is PM me and ask.

Def

[Etherealicer]

[...]
The reason we don't see as many tool variations is this- multitools cost too bloody much.

Think about it this way- you take a fancy tactical folder, which has maybe two moving parts- the blade and lock bar.  You rearrange a few things, add some fancy material, and BOOM!  $250.

Then you take a relatively simple multitool, which has a moving plier head, two rotating handles and four rotating functions inside each, along with a lock mechanism on either side for a total of roughly 13 moving parts.  And, if your tool is over $75, it will be a hard sell.  Only Leatherman has been successful in beating the $100 barrier.

Now remember that these are likely to be used harder and abused more than any tactical type pocket knife, since the pretty knives go away and the multitools come out when you get to the hard jobs, which means you need to make them as solid as you can or else you will get a reputation for making crap.

So, you need to make a relatively complex product with a very limited budget and next to no markup, or you can make a comparatively simple product with a profit margin the size of the Grand Canyon.

Which product are you likely to put your best designers on?[...]

Pretty much agree...

Did write my thoughts about it a while ago, although from the user perspective and the consequences for the user: High Quality MT vs PRICE

The limited profit margin in the MT market limits the development of new tools.

[Grant Lamontagne]

You were absolutely correct then and you are absolutely correct now.

Def

[Etherealicer]

You were absolutely correct then and you are absolutely correct now.

Def

I should make that my signature: Grant agrees with me

[Grant Lamontagne]

You can if you want, but that isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for your opinions! 

Def

[AimlessWanderer]

The DE razor you showed is my most modern type of shaving aparatus. I have three DE razors, and every other type of razor I have predates DE blades 

[Grant Lamontagne]

The DE razor you showed is my most modern type of shaving aparatus. I have three DE razors, and every other type of razor I have predates DE blades 

Ok, you win.  I will withdraw my post and let you get back to DOS and Basic on your C-64, as it is obviously the finest method of surfing the internets as well. 

I unreservedly concede my point to you! 

Def

[AimlessWanderer]

[Grant Lamontagne]

Nice try, but from now on you are only allowed to use the 8 bit banana!



Or else you will have to agree with my comments.... 

Def

[AimlessWanderer]

Sorry, my bad, that didn't get through, I let the string go slack between the two tin cans. Try again mate 

[Grant Lamontagne]

Yeah, that happens a lot as we get older.

Def

[dks]

so, the topic of this thread was covered a lot better in a brilliant thread a few months ago....

[AimlessWanderer]

so, the topic of this thread was covered a lot better in a brilliant thread a few months ago....

It never hurts to repeat wise words though.

Did I ever explain my thoughts on the Juice line up.......? 

[dks]

...or on collecting....

[Etherealicer]

so, the topic of this thread was covered a lot better in a brilliant thread a few months ago....

It never hurts to repeat wise words though.

Did I ever explain my thoughts on the Juice line up.......? 

No. Did you ever?