

The myth of razors and razor blades - swombat
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/entrepreneurs/articles/20100915/23234611035/the-myth-of-razors-and-razor-blades.shtml

======
thasmin
What I never got about this myth is why people thought that the razors should
cost more than the blades. The razor is molded plastic and the blades are a
bit of plastic holding a small bit of metal that are honed so they easily cut
hair and have a hard time cutting skin. There's no reason to think that the
plastic should cost more than the blades. My best guess as to why the blades
are expensive would be to cover marketing costs and for patented technology.

~~~
rdrimmie
For much of last century, when the legend of the Gillette model originated,
razors were not plastic.

------
brc
I think one thing that often gets overlooked in these types of things is
whether or not Gillete just executed on other parts of their business plan
better than their competitors. Maybe their sales force was twice as good,
maybe their distribution was more reliable, maybe it was just more effective
marketing. Perhaps they just figured out a way to manufacture blades 20%
cheaper than their competitors.

For while the razor/razorblades story gets the headlines, for a lot of other
products there is one company dominating the category for no apparent reason.
Coca Cola, for instance, doesn't have any real benefit over other drinks, but
they have a fearsome salesforce, marketing and distribution.

All I'm saying is that perhaps Gilletes main competitive advantage is kept
quiet because everyone thinks it's their razor+blades strategy, and the
company likes it that way because it stops people looking at other parts of
the business to copy.

~~~
Untitled
> Coca Cola, for instance, doesn't have any real benefit over other drinks,
> but they have a fearsome salesforce, marketing and distribution.

Not as simple as that. Firstly, it is extremely difficult to enter the drinks
market (setting up a countrywide distribution network, etc...).

What Coke also does (in some countries) is giving the owner of Cafes, garages
and small shops a fridge (loan on permanent basis). The condition of the
fridge is simple - the owner can only stock it with Coke-a-Cola products.

So right there the retailer is locked in - to distribute a smaller
competitor's drinks, he would have to buy a whole fridge (or the competitor
must provide a fridge). This is not likely - hence the lock-in. The customer
is not locked in, the distributor is.

Another thing that Coke does is prevent competition between small retailers.
You must sell Coke’s products at their recommended price (otherwise you have
to pay more). They also sell the products to larger retailers at a lower price
(and they in turn may not sell it at the reduced price to smaller retailers).

If Coke wants to launch a new product, they basically force small retailers to
carry their product (whether they want to buy it or not).

So, yeah, Coke is a pretty nasty company. Luckily for the guys in the USA,
there is actual competition (Pepsi).

~~~
brc
Everything you have said confirms that Coke has a fearsome sales force and
distribution business. And that proves my point - it's not the taste of the
drink but the way in which it is put in front of everyone that might be
thirsty that makes them successful.

------
asmithmd1
King Gillette is the patron saint of late bloomers. He was a very average
salesperson until he thought of the idea of disposable razors in his 40's. He
didn't sell his first razor blade until 1903 when he was 48 years old -- that
year he sold 51 razors and 168 blades, but by 1915 he sold 450,000 razors 70
million blades.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Camp_Gillette>

------
m0th87
Unrelated protip: Steam is what causes the blades to degrade so quickly. If
you leave your blades outside of the bathroom, they last for a long time. I've
used the same blade for about six months so far.

~~~
kree10
I've been using this technique with a disposable blade for the past few
months: [http://consumerist.com/2010/03/make-your-disposable-razor-
bl...](http://consumerist.com/2010/03/make-your-disposable-razor-blade-last-
for-20-months.html)

I keep my razor in the shower, too, though maybe if I didn't it could go even
longer.

~~~
aloria
Yep; it's similar to how barbers rub their razors on leather-- called
"stropping," IIRC. It apparently smooths out any microscopic dings in the
blades' edge. It also helps to realign the blades in the case of those multi-
blade cartridges.

------
JoeAltmaier
Shaving is special product: its personal. Nicks, pulls, uneven results: you
feel it intensely. Once you find something that works, there is a large
resistance to change.

Flip side: once something fails, folks flee in droves. Remington(?) famous
case: stopped replacing "sharpening disks" every shift to save money; lots of
flawed razors shipped; sales dropped precipitously until they tracked the
problem back.

I'd think these things matter lots more than the "rational customer" model of
economic efficiency.

------
10ren
Nit: the lock-in is that other razors don't fit (like apple usb).

Sure, plug-compatibility is trivial, but Gillette had sufficient market power
at that point to cut off any retailer stocking them.

~~~
gmlk
"Like apple usb"

In what way did you mean that?

~~~
chaosmachine
Apple USB keyboards notoriously come with a USB extension cable that's notched
in the middle, so it doesn't fit other USB devices.

Here's a picture: <http://imgur.com/Aweqo.jpg>

Technically, if you're willing to risk damaging it, you can force a regular
USB device in there, but it sticks out at a weird angle because of the notch.

~~~
philwelch
That's an example of lock-in that makes absolutely no sense. Why would you do
that with USB extension cords of all things? The only reason I can think of--
it physically locks the cables together better so it doesn't pop open in the
middle of the extension cord where it's difficult to reach and reattach.

~~~
gxti
I'm pretty sure they do it because the keyboard can't source the required
500mA of current. They "proprietarize" it in order to keep people from
plugging high-current devices in.

~~~
chaosmachine
The keyboard itself contains a 2 port USB hub (regular ports, btw, with enough
juice to power a Wacom tablet and charge my phone at the same time), so I'm
not sure that makes sense.

~~~
gxti
Never mind, then. I have no idea why they did it but there's probably a
perfectly valid technical explanation.

------
positr0nic
I've had much better luck since I invested in an expensive (~$200) electric
shaver. I have very sensitive skin and it was the only method I found that
allowed me to shave with any frequency without too many problems. I still have
a tendency to shave about once a week however. At which point I'll usually
have to use a trimmer first, and then the shaver.

~~~
rubashov
I've found electric to be the only way to comfortably shave daily. Wet is a
little closer, but doing it daily just tears up the skin too much.

------
TGJ
It makes no sense, but what aggravates me about Gillete is that when you buy
the razor and head, they only give you 2 extra razors instead of filling out
the package with 4. I suppose it is because when you go looking for a razor,
if you had to buy the head and the 4 razors the price would be so high no one
would want to purchase it. It's one of those sleight of the hands the
companies play that once observed, is infuriating.

~~~
philwelch
It's not that aggravating to me personally--that just means I have three
blades instead of five before I have to decide whether to try another razor or
buy more cartridges for the same one. I _hate_ wasting or throwing things
away, so if I hate the razor completely I won't have to suffer through it for
very long if it only comes with 2 more blades.

Really, I'd be happy if it just came with no extra blades at all.

------
adlep
Great article, and it is relevant to my startup. Thanks for the link.

------
hackermom
And here's the reality on the consumer end of things today, straight from the
horse's mouth (my husband):

Before: 16 years of avg. $13/month for a 4/5-pack of Gillette cartridges (they
are $16 a pack today), along with razorburn and inflamed follicles due to
their cartridges' design of pulling the hairs up and cutting them off below
the level of the skin.

Today: a single $60 investment for a Merkur safety razor, and $9/ _YEAR_ for
20 blades (40 razor edges, each lasting longer than any of Gillette's
cartridges), with almost no razorburn, and not a single inflamed follicle
since "the switch".

~~~
stonemetal
Anecdotes are not data. I use a Gillette, I just bought a 10 pack of blades
for 16 dollars. That is going to last me a year, maybe longer. I shave
properly. Hot shower, proper technique never had razor burn ever. As the
saying goes the poor craftsmen blames his tools.

~~~
hackermom
This is by no means a slandering or questioning of your masculinity, but, if
you can manage to go for a whole year on just 10 blades then maybe it is so
that your particular stubble is playing into the equation? Some men have
velvet skin and "peach fuzz" beard, and some men have leather skin and steel
wool growing out of their chin.

~~~
stonemetal
Perhaps, it does take me a day to get five o'clock shadow. Though if I go a
day without shaving I can give my wife and daughter a rash from brushing up
against it.

Though that is neither here nor there, Gillette style razors are some of the
most popular razors out there if they were really that poor they wouldn't have
replaced their predecessors as they cost more and would perform poorly.

~~~
Groxx
> _if they were really that poor..._

Unfortunately, this ignores the power of good advertisement. For example: the
entire fashion industry relies on _generating_ desire to have something, not
on any intrinsic value.

------
napierzaza
So it's a myth, because Gillette didn't ALWAYS make their margins on the
blades? I don't see the logic. They're still giving away the razors with one
blade and expecting you to buy razors for it.

~~~
michael_dorfman
The point is that their current business model (give away the razor, sell the
blades) is not the secret of their success-- that during the time they had
explosive growth and became dominant, they actually had a very different
business model.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Did I read it wrong? Explosive growth occurred WHEN they switched to the
classic model (from the patent-protected model).

