What makes a $800.00 bow better than a $200.00 bow?

[LBR]

Wow--this one has sure taken a side road.....

I just re-read the entire thing, and couldn't find where anyone said any bowyer should just give their work away, or that no bow should cost more than certain amount, or umpteen other "replies" to statements that were never made to begin with.

I hope the guy who originally started this thread was able to get some sort of viable answer to his question.  Guess the obvious answer is "depends on who you ask".

As far as the most recent comments go........

I'll start with this:  I'm not a bowyer, I never have been a bowyer, and I have no intentions of ever becoming a bowyer.  I have several years experience in tradtional archery, with hundreds of different bows, and I ask a lot of different bowyers a lot of different questions, so I'm not totally ignorant, but I realize there's a lot you can only learn with hands-on experience.

However, I can relate to making a product with my own hands, "custom" if you will.  I'm not saying strings are the same as bows, but business is business, and I've managed to stay in business for close to 10 years now.  I've survived a few attempts at cutting my throat, and things are now better than ever.  

I love to make strings, I'll never get rich making strings, but there's no way I could put as much time and money as I do into it without making a profit.  I have to eat and pay my bills like anyone else.  If it cost me to do it, at best I'd only make them for myself and close friends, and I'd have a "real" job on the side to pay bills.  However, I've learned to make them well enough and fast enough to at least make enough profit to keep the business viable.  Bill collectors could care less how much you love what you do--unless you have an alternative cash supply, you either make money or you go under.

I didn't invent flemish or endless strings, I just developed my own personal way of making them.  I don't care if someone copies it--heck, I was involved in making a DVD to show people exactly how I do mine!  The reason being is I know that as long as I treat my customers right, and put out a quality product, I will be in business.  

I know there's a lot of folks that make them, and some charge a lot less than I do (and some charge more). My sales have increased since releasing the DVD!  No idea just how that works, since there's now thousands more people who have step-by-step instructions on how to make them exactly like I do, without having to invest years and years, along with thousands of strings and hundreds of pounds of material, of trial and error to figure it out.  Obviously I'm not the least bit worried about someone copying my work and putting me out of business.

This next part isn't intended to step on any toes, but it probably will.  I agree with another poster that there are very few new innovations in this sport.  Materials may change and/or improve, but pretty much every bow on the market is in some way, shape, or form a copy of someone else's ideas.  A long time ago somebody figured out putting a backing on a wood bow improved it.  Then glass.  Then carbon.  Some folks have just figured out how to do it better, more efficiently, cheaper, or whatever.  

Everyone who's been in this sport for any amount of time is familiar with the BW limb coming off the belly side of the riser.  Ben Pearson had a model like that years and years ago.  I don't know if BW came up with the idea first, or Mr. Pearson, but BW took the idea and made it work.  As far as I know, Pearson Archery only had the one model like that, and I don't think it ever took off.  Samick can copy the look of a BW, but it will never be a BW, and folks that want a BW won't buy a Samick because of the looks.  Just like most of my customers don't come to me just because they want a string that looks similar to mine, they come to me because they want a string that I built.

Metal risers are nothing new.  They have come and gone (on this side of the sport anyway) and are obviously gaining popularity again.  If something looks like it's going to make money, somebody is going to copy it and take shorcuts if possible, or simply figure out a more efficient/cheaper/better way to make them.
 
It's not cool, especially if you are the one that spent your time and money getting the trend going, but that's the American way.  It's no secret, and certainly nothing new.  

If you can develop something that is truly innovative, the only thing to do to protect your investment is patent it, else you'll just have to be honored that someone liked your idea well enough to use it themself--"imitation is the highest form of flattery".  Then you will have to stay one step ahead of the competion, putting out a product that is better, offering better service, and/or sell it at a better price.  Again, the American way.  Nobody ever said it was fair.

Look at it from another POV.  Reckon how much time and money Mr. Earl Hoyt Jr. invested in the ILF system?  How many different companies now use that?  Does Mr. Hoyt get any royalties from his innovation?  

I have no idea who invented flemish or endless strings, but I'm glad I don't have to pay them royalties.  I simply have to take my own advice to stay ahead of the competition, or at least do enough business to remain viable.  If someone figures out how to do it better, cheaper, etc. and puts me out of business........oh well.  I'm sure I'd fuss and gripe, but what good will that do?

It happens to businesses all the time.  Business chains--whether it be Wal-Mart, Auto Zone, McDonalds, Bass Pro, etc. are prime examples.  Even in our own ranks, we have big trad stores that the smaller guys can hardley compete with.

Big stores, big money, dang hard to hang in there with them around.  However, there are still a lot of "little guys" that figured out how to stay in business, even flourish, with the big competition.  The little guys (myself included) just have to work harder, longer, better, etc. or move on.  Like I learned a long time ago, life ain't fair.  We can either fuss about it, or deal with it.

Chad

[Papa Bull]

Chad, the string business and bow business are very, very different.  Everyone who has a bow is a potential customer for multiple strings for each bow.  The bow market is a lot more limited and a lot more competitive.  It's like comparing the tire market to the automobile market.  

Ask a custom knifemaker what he thinks about another knifemaker copying a very successful design of his, calling it an original and selling it for less.  It's done but knifemakers don't approve of or condone such things.  But it's one of those gray areas where it's an ethical question instead of a legal question.

[dachba]

I've been following this thread but decided to keep my big mouth shut    

Having said that, from my viewpoint, I think Chad says it all, and says it eloquently.

Dave in Ft. Collins, CO

[Lenny Stankowitz]

Chad:

Don't let anyone tell you that building and selling bows is different that building and selling srings.  It is simply not true. The same principles of business apply.  Just because you may have more of a demand for the shear volume of strings, your net profit per string is a heck of a lot less than it is for a bow.  You must to deal in volume in order to make it work.  Any small custom bowyer would be tickled to be able to make and sell 10 bows a week, not to mention he or she would make a pretty darn good living.  If you had to live on selling 10 strings a week, your wife better have a dang good job.
 
You are absolutely, positively, 100% right on the money.  Excuses can be made about this, that, or the other thing but the fact of the matter is, your competition NEVER puts you out of business.  If you can no longer produce what the public wants, at a price they are willing to pay, and service it after the sale, you are putting yourself out of business.  

If there are enough people out there that are willing to pay five or ten thousand dollars for a Rolex, they will survive and thrive.  People in the market for a "Roleks" aren't, or never were in the market for a Rolex.  On the other hand, you simply don't have to pay that kind of money to get a very high quality timepiece.  Regardless of what Rolex may say, you can spend a couple hundred bucks and get a watch that is just as functional, and just as accurate.  If, and this is the million dollar question, the buying public is happy with a 200.00 watch, the manufacturer of that watch did not put Rolex out of business.  Rolex no longer met the wants and desires of the customer.  

Did Henry Ford put the buggy makers out of business?  Did he invent the automobile? Or did he simply find a way to mass produce a product that the American people wanted at a price that they could afford and give it to them in a timely manner?

[Lenny Stankowitz]

One other thing I might add is that quite often perception is equally as improtant if not more important than reality.

If I spent half my time picketing in front of my competitors buliding sites, or putting signs out in the right of way that said "dont buy this house because the builder uses the same building materials I do and he blind nails his facia just like I do so it's just not fair..."  do you think that would hurt or help my business?

Do you think it would hurt or help your business Chad if you had everyone that bought your DVD sign a non-compete agreement that says  "if you watch this DVD, you can never produce a flemish string in the manner shown on this DVD or use a jig like the one seen on this DVD or use any of the raw materials used on this DVD if your intention is to offer any of your strings for sale...?"

I don't even think you need to answer that question.

[DAS Kinetic]

Chad,
   There are no patents.  Patents are an urban myth.  The average small business man would spend every penny he would make in his career getting and then attempting to defend a patent.  And that, with no assurance that even a valid patent could be defended.  Even the patent office does not certify that the patent they issue you is valid.  That's right, it is worth nothing unless you have the financial power to overcome an opponent in court.  Even if you do get a good ruling, what are you going to get in damages??  You just spent 5 years and $250,000 to get a ruling and now the loser declares bankruptcy and walks away.  Anyone who has the money to get and defend a patent doesn't need to be in business at all.  They are independently wealthy.

Here are some facts:
1.  The US government does not certify that any patent they issue is valid.  They claim no liability. and offer no enforcement
2.  A simple Patent will cost $10,000 and can take 7 to 10 years to get.  More complicted common patents can run over $20,000 and take even longer.
3.  Until a patent is granted, you have zero rights to defend it.  Anyone can take your patent information straight out of the patent office and use it with impunity for all the years that the patent is being reviewed.
4.  The US government does don't defend patents or your rights under patent law.  You do.
5.  Most patent litigation ends in nothing more than a cease operation order.  Getting actual damages is rare.  It's extremely rare to even recover your expenses. Patents only benefit two groups: large corps with millions at stake, and attorneys.  Everyone else loses.
6.  If a patent suit is brought, the patent holder has to finance the effort in the state where the offender lives.  It costs much more to bring a patent suit than it does to defend yourself from one.
7.  Many foriegn countries don't even honor our patents, like china, so in many cases they are totally worthless.
8.  Most patent disputes are decided by the depth of the pockets, not who is right or wrong.  The first one to run out of money loses.

   I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything though.  I gave that up a long time ago.  This is just some info for the uninformed.

David

[Bob Morrison]

If a builder is building houses without a license, not building to code etc., I shouldnt have to compete against that. Not my statement..I still can't see the difference here..... I give up Why shoot an $800 bow then you can get one for $200...........

[Papa Bull]

Bob, I don't envy you guys.  This is a tiny niche market and it's as cut throat as any, so lots of risk with little to gain.  I had thought about getting into making bows and thought it would be an idyllic life but more power to you guys in the business.  I don't know how you keep doing it but I'm glad you do.

[Lenny Stankowitz]

It's really quite simple Bob.  Are you or DAS Kinetic suggesting that someone is building bows illegally?  If so, who, and what laws are they breaking?

There really is no dispute here, the consumer is going to make the decision as to who stays in business and who doesn't, not one's competition.

[Papa Bull]

Originally posted by Lenny Stankowitz:
There really is no dispute here, the consumer is going to make the decision as to who stays in business and who doesn't, not one's competition.

When there aren't enough customers to support two businesses, the one with the deepest pockets need only hang in there long enough for his competitor to starve under siege.  It's unfortunate.  If the market was larger, perhaps both would do well.  One guy, however, makes his product for his livelihood and needs cash flow to keep the business fluid.  The other guy has millions to throw at it, win, lose or draw.  It's a foregone conclusion to me how this will end up going and it's got nothing whatsoever to do with the quality or price of the product.  That market is a splinter of a splinter of a splinter.  

But that's life and that's business.  So the world will keep turning and I think Dave will do very well for himself but he'll have to ditch the archery business and move on to something else in order to do it.  It'll be a loss to us, but we'll all get over it and in the end, I think Dave will be better off even if it's the end of a good thing for traditional archery.  

Time will tell how it all goes down, but that's my  educated guess.  I know enough about Dave's business and this market to know that it's an untenable situation and there isn't a thing Dave can do about it except figure out a plan B for life after bowmaking.  Sometimes you just have to cut your losses and move on.

[Lenny Stankowitz]

"It's a foregone conclusion to me how this will end up going and it's got nothing whatsoever to do with the quality or price of the product. That market is a splinter of a splinter of a splinter."

That's what they told Ken Beck when he took over Black Widow.  There are at least 20 times the custom bowyers now than there were then and BW just continues to grow.  They said he was nuts.  They said not enough people want to shoot those old bows anymore.  They called him crazy.  The market for what DAS Kinetic does is in it's infancy.  In my humble opinion, in 10 years the traditional archery landscape will be completely different than it is today.  DAS Kinetic and a few others have the opportunity to be at the top of the heap when this transition takes place.  

Let's hope he doesn't take the above belief, adopt it and make it a self fulfilling prophesy.

 

[Papa Bull]

Lenny, it's got nothing to do with a self-fulfilling prophecy.  It's got to do with demographics.  Black Widows have been around for a long, long time - before compounds became the norm.  The worst hurdle Dave had to overcome was the "metal bows ain't traditional noway" mindset.  That made things very dicey and is still a very significant factor.  It was unfortunate enough that as soon as he made enough headway to possibly turn it around and was no longer getting beaten about the head and shoulders by traditional purists, the other fella decided the fruit was ripe for the picking and squeezed the trigger on the "me too" project, which of course, was the las thing he needed.

So who knows how it will go.  I hate to admit it, but I'd find a certain amount of irony and poetic justice in this whole thing if Dave ditched this and then the guys who hated his guts for ruining "traditional archery" with that metal bow nonsense started piling on the "other guy", who so far has had a free ride there.

I think the wheels are in motion for a result that will wind up with the "me too" project dying out due to a severe miscalculation in market potential, but only after Dave has been forced to throw in the towel.  There's only so many times you can run up against a brick wall before you decide it's best to take another path.  I give Dave very high marks for dedication in sticking with the project this long after all he's been through.  

I hope he can stick it out, but I wouldn't blame him one bit if he shrugged his shoulders and moved on to something that wasn't nearly as stressful or dicey.

[dachba]

Right on, Lenny!  DAS Kinetic is one of the good ones.  If I could afford one of his bows, I would own one.  I've heard nothing but good about his bow (you too Bob, you make one of the really great bows).

The last thing we should do is discourage these bowyers.
Dave in Ft. Collins, CO

[Lenny Stankowitz]

"I think the wheels are in motion for a result that will wind up with the "me too" project dying out due to a severe miscalculation in market potential"

With all due respect, I think it might be you that is miscalculating the potential for this market.  

Hoyt saw the potential for a metal riser hunting bow long before DAS Kinetic brought a bow to market.  They have and continue to sell scads of these bows both under the Hoyt and Reflex nameplate.  In my opinion, these bows don't even compare to the quality of the short riser / ILF limb combination.  This market in my opinion is going to explode and "all ships will rise with the tide" so to speak.  You are always going to have a segment of the traditional archery community that is unwilling to even entertain the thought of such a bow but as more and more people are exposed, more and more people are going to see the benefits of such a product.  This doesn't even take into account the archers that for whatever reason lose interest in modern archery equipment.  Many of these people have ONLY held a compound in their hands.  Many, if not the majority of the people that shoot traditional equipment today either started on traditional equipment and never swithed when the compound came out or they started on traditional equipment, went to a compound and then came back.  Wooden longbows and recurves are what they know.  It IS tradition.  We have an entire new generation of "potential" traditional archers that have never held a wooden bow in their hand.  When they decide to make the transition from modern equipment, what do you think will be the next logical step for them?  Do you think they are going to jump from a Mathews Switchback to a snakey osage selfbow?  

Think beyond the current marketplace a little.  Successful businesses have to cater to the current marketplace for sure, but more importantly is the need to look at what the marketplace is likely to morph into in the next few years and be prepared to meet those needs.  People that are in a position to fill that need are going to be the ones that are going to be successful and there are going to be a lot of bowyers in my opnion scrambling to play catch-up.

[Papa Bull]

I guess we'll all see.

[LBR]

Methinks Lenny may be on to something.  Wasn't that many years ago carbon arrows were considered to be an abomination to traditional archery by a lot of folks--now they seem to be in the majority of quivers, both hunting and target.

It's just a cold hard fact of life in the business world--the little guy is always going to have a hard row to hoe.  The little guy is always going to have to work harder, better, longer, and smarter to stay alive, and will need some luck to even think about getting ahead.  Doesn't matter if it's bows, strings, or widgets--business is business, and the allmighty dollar is going to be the driving force.  Just loving what you do won't pay the bills.  

The best advice I can offer is rather than getting aggravated or even lowering your standards for some kind of short-term payback (that will bite you square on the butt sooner and/or later), use it as a motivator to push you to make your product better.

Chad

[Papa Bull]

Originally posted by LBR:
It's just a cold hard fact of life in the business world--the little guy is always going to have a hard row to hoe.  The little guy is always going to have to work harder, better, longer, and smarter to stay alive, and will need some luck to even think about getting ahead.

Yep. The little guy that's been an integral part of the community for a long time doing the innovation out of love for the sport needs luck and, more importantly, real support from the community.  Folks saying "well, gee, just hang in there in spite of everything, dude" won't pay any bills and paying bills is necessary for "hanging in there".  Maybe there's enough support for Dave to make it long term, but judging from how loyal people have been and what people consider right and fair tell me that it's just not there.  

I hope I'm wrong about that, but I seem to have misplaced my rose colored glasses.

[Lenny Stankowitz]

Just remember, every "big guy" started out a "little guy."

Very seldom does a little guy get to be a big guy by jacking people around.  If he does manage to to pull it off, it never lasts long.  let's keep in mind that some of these people that we are talking about have been serving the archery community for decades.  Very seldom does a little guy become a big guy based on years and years of hard work and customer service and then overnight turn into a "crooked guy."  Just doesn't make sense.

[Papa Bull]

Originally posted by Lenny Stankowitz:
Just remember, every "big guy" started out a "little guy."

Not always.  Some get their big guy card handed to them by their fathers.  But there are others like Bill Gates, who did make a fortune on their own by killing their competition any way possible, legal, ethical or principled notions notwithstanding.  It's actually quite easy to do well in business if you can put scruples aside whenever it's convenient.  Bill Gates is a great example of that.  He sure didn't get to be fabulously wealthy by offering the best operating systems and software and fair, honest business practices.     He did a great job of squashing the guys that built a better product.  He either bought them out, stole the product outright or crushed them under his heel by destroying their market with lowball prices.

But that's just business.

[Lenny Stankowitz]

I remember my Mom telling me one time that for some reason, the people that trust the least seem to be the least trustworty.

I'm sure this isn't always true but I bet it is in most cases.