Frank Cahill wrote: > Hi folks, The answer to your question seems obvious to me. Most of the > pianos that are sold these days, I beleive, are verticals. I suspect > they are also the cheaper verticals of manufacturers' product line. > Profit margin is probably less on the vert. pianos than for grands. I doubt it. The dollar amount may be smaller due to the lower selling price, but the profit margin is probably the same. > Now, maybe a re-scaling would make the piano better from the tuner's > point of view. But most owners of cheap pianos, from my experience, are > not able to appreciate a well scaled piano. Most of these pianos don't > even sound all that great after being tuned, at least to me. Even if this observation were universally true -- and I don't accept that it is -- it would still not be a valid argument for not building the best instrument possible within a given price structure. Good acoustic design does not have to cost any more to build than does poor acoustic design. In other words, that cheap vertical could sound considerably better than it does and still be a cheap vertical. At least for its given life span it could produce better music. > So, if changes were made as you suggest, I don't think it would increase > sales at all! Why then, would a manufacturer re-tool, spend lots of > money on the lowest profit margin segment of his product line, when > increased sales would be unlikely? First, in many, if not most, cases it would not cost the manufacturer "lots of money" to retool to build a better sounding product. The materials would probably not cost any more than they do now. The assembly line would require little, if any expensive rework. And, as noted, it's doubtful that these low cost pianos are sold at any lower margins than any other part of a given line. Second, I've only had experience with a couple of redesigned products in the market place. But that experience indicates that they do indeed sell more. Even in a market that is shrinking overall. Third, it's a competitive marketplace and you're forgetting about market share. If I can make my piano sound better and still sell it for the same price, there's a good chance I can increase my market share. For example. If I already have 20% of the market in a certain segment -- Who knows? -- by improving my product I might be able to get 22%. Assuming my margins stay the same -- and they should -- I'm going to make a lot more money. If the overall market did not grow, then that extra 2% came from some other manufacturer who did not bother to improve their product. That's their problem. Mine is trying to figure out where to spend the extra money. > I was once at one of Al Sanerson's seminars. In the room was a rep from > Baldwin. This question came up during class. The rep's reply was that > they sold hold millions of these pianos...why change? I remember hearing this argument in just about those words years ago -- just before the Japanese began exporting pianos to the US in huge quantities. Had the US manufacturers been building better pianos -- or if they had responded to the threat by developing better pianos -- there is no way the imports would have had the success in this country that they have had. Again, think of the market share. Ask that Baldwin rep how their sales -- and their market share -- stack up today compared to 20 years ago. There market share might look good when compared to the other US manufacturers. But probably not when compared to the overall market. > I doubt piano sales are down because of poor scaling. Most people I > know have owned more than one computer and have spent more money on > those computers and associated equipment to purchase a very nice high > end upright. These same people will hesitate to spend the money for a > very much needed regulation. Well, it's a matter of priorities. And those do change. I'm talking about position in an overall market regardless of its size. As far as piano sales being down as a result of poor scaling -- actually poor overall acoustic design -- just look at the current sales figures for Aeolian. Or Wurlitzer. Or Kimball. > Piano sales are down for one simple reason...peoples priorities have > changed! They buy VCRs, computers, answering machines, micorwave ovens, > luxury cars, cell phones...almost all of which did not exist 20 years > ago. (yes..VCR/camcorders were around in the late 60's. They cost about > $2000. VW bugs sold for about $1600 back then.) There is no one simple reason why piano sales are down, although this is certainly one of them. But again, at the risk of beating a dead donkey, I say, "remember the market share!" > I agree that it would be nice to tune nicely scaled starter pianos, but > it won't happen. It's not cost effective. I come from a manufacturing > environment...if it won't increase the profit margin or allow increased > sales via lower pricing, product redesign probably won't happen. It costs absolutely no more money to build a piano with a good scale design than it does to build one with a poor scale design. None. And I also have spent some time in and around manufacturing -- specifically, piano manufacturing. I've seen what happens when an upgraded product hits the marketplace. And so, the question remains unanswered... Regards. Del
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC