Official Luthiers Forum!

[QUOTE=Pwoolson]If you market yourself as a great builder before you are one, it can have disastrous effects.
[/QUOTE]

Paul,

You have just identified the biggest fallacy of the current adoration of "branding" in the business world. There are far too many people in business today -- as well as far too many books, magazines and consultants -- who believe that you can create a brand by advertising.

The truth is that you have to BE the brand. It has to be a part of everything you do.

And that's because of the fact that customers create your brand identity. You do not. A luthier may want to create the brand identity of being a builder of high-quality, high-priced guitars for discriminating buyers. Such a luthier can spend all he wants on advertising and other marketing vehicles, but if the guitars he produces have obvious flaws, his brand identity among consumers will become one of producing overpriced guitars of low quality.

A couple of years ago, I was called in to talk with a client about starting a new brand awareness campaign. The company told me that they had a poor reputation for customer service (deservedly so) and wanted a new marketing campaign that would build its identity as a customer-focused company that provided unmatched customer service. I asked what they were doing to improve their customer service and they told me they were not changing anything. When I told them that any campaign would be a waste of money if they did not change, they told me I was probably not a good choice for the assignment and they would get someone else. They got someone else, spent a few hundred thousand dollars and got nothing. The company has since been absorbed by a competitor.

So, the most important lesson I can offer to any luthier interested in building a brand identity is simply this .....

Be Your Brand.

Jim

Jim, I agree 100% with everything you said. Be your brand! Words to live by.

[QUOTE=Hesh1956]Ads have always been something that is very difficult to measure the effectiveness of in as much as the return on investment, if there is any……, can take time to occur and may not be traceable to the ad.[/QUOTE]

It is not all that difficult to trace the effectiveness of an ad. When you get a call from a prospective customer, ask them how they heard of you.


[QUOTE=Hesh1956]Telling a prospect that customers are treated like family, emails, photos, calls etc. will be very attractive to some folks.[/QUOTE]

Whenever a business tells me it treats customers like family, my first thought is that the people at the company must have some pretty rotten families if they want me instead.


[QUOTE=Hesh1956]Everything that you do from building the guitars, branding, marketing, PR all is by design to get you to the point where you are speaking to a real, qualified prospect for what you offer. [/QUOTE]

Here is my quibble point again. Branding should not be an item on a list of things you do to market your products. Branding is EVERYTHING you do. The guitars you build. The advertising you create. The way you write emails. Even the way you answer the phone. It is all branding because it all creates a perception in the customer's mind of who and what you are.

Jim

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel] Here is my quibble point again. Branding should not be an item on a list of things you do to market your products. Branding is EVERYTHING you do. The guitars you build. The advertising you create. The way you write emails. Even the way you answer the phone. It is all branding because it all creates a perception in the customer's mind of who and what you are.Jim[/QUOTE]


Clearly... you "get" that brands are built on the entire "experience" from the product, to the customer service, to the selection of materials, to the graphic standards to... well... everything.

But where did you get the idea that brands are built with advertising? Or that you can't control your brand? Sure you can. No credible book (or expert) on branding would ever suggest that you build brands on advertising. Never. That is lunacy.

Do you think Nike, Disney, Coca Cola, etc. are not in control of their brand image? Sure they are. It takes constant maintenance and adjustment, but it can be done. You can use advertising to *communicate* your brand message, but you can't build a brand on advertising.   This may seem like semantics, but there is a profound difference.

The first step really involves an exploration of the market (in terms of where the opportunities are) and the second is an introspection to say what can YOU realistically do, live up to the promise of, and be happy with.

Brands are not built on advertising... They are built on the whole experience. You have to look @ EVERYTHING you do with an eye on brand. It touches everything.


I guess the first question you have to ask... is are the guitars any good? If they suck or your work isn't up to the standards you want you should spend your time in the shop working on your skills.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Excellent thread. Lots of good ideas. I just ordered my copy of Full Frontal PR (you can find it for $6 or $7 on Ebay, Half.com, or Amazon.) For me, this will be channeled towards my computer programming business, not the lutherie business, as I'm not likely to ever be a pro luthier. But this info covers some business concepts that have been nebulous for me.

The idea of "be the brand" makes me think of Martha Stewart. Whatever you think about her, you know she certainly followed the logic of "be the brand" with great passion. Worked for her.

Dennis

_________________
Dennis Leahy
Duluth, MN, USA
7th Sense Multimedia

Being the brand is really what our customers want.   They want to think of the little old guitar maker in the apron whittling away in the workshop with a cozy fire going in the wood stove and happy music on the stereo.   I call it the "Geppetto Factor"...as in the visuals from the Disney Pinnocchio movie of Geppetto in his workshop.   Or our customers want to think of a Les Paul, boy genius guitar player/inventor with his Pauverizer box...an early looping machine.   Our customers want to buy a dream and a story with our guitars.

We are the brand. I've established a lot of my brand by writing tens of thousands of words for magazines.   I've written for Guitar Player since 1972, Acoustic Guitar since 1990, I wrote 60 full page columns for Bass Player, etc., etc.    Every time one of those articles comes out I look at it and calculate what a full page ad would have cost, and then I smile when I bank the check I got for writing that full page article.   Let's see...pay $3,000.00 or more for that page? Or get paid $300.00 to write it?   Now that's a no-brainer if I've ever had one in my life.

We're not just selling guitars, we're selling our personalities.

And Ken, your guitars are not selling themselves if you're packing them up and taking them to shows. Your guitars are not selling themselves if you take a nanosecond to talk to a customer. You are selling your guitars, and you are putting money and time into that effort.   If you think your guitars are selling themselves, then just try getting them to build themselves. The logic is the same... Don't delude yourself.

[QUOTE=Brock Poling]But where did you get the idea that brands are built with advertising? Or that you can't control your brand? Sure you can. No credible book (or expert) on branding would ever suggest that you build brands on advertising. Never. That is lunacy.
[/QUOTE]

First, I do not think that brands can be created with advertising on a long term basis. My message specifically stated that brands CANNOT be built with advertising. So, if you are going to argue with me, please argue based on what I said. Don't put words in my mouth.

What I did say is that some companies, individuals and consultants do believe that brands can be built with advertising. That observation comes from 25 years of working in the business world in marketing.  If you read the example I gave in one of my messages, I talked about a client who wanted to rebuild its brand as a customer-focused company through advertising, not by becoming customer focused.

But I can give an example of a companies that tried to create its brand through advertising. Take LG, for example, in home electronics. LG was known as Goldstar, but switched to LG. As soon as it switched, it started with a massive advertising campaign that tried to convinced people that the LG name had been around for years, that it produced high quality products and that it was a technological leader. The problem for LG is that reality did not match the brand it tried to create with advertising.



[QUOTE=Brock Poling]Do you think Nike, Disney, Coca Cola, etc. are not in control of their brand image? Sure they are. [/QUOTE]

They are not all as in control as you think. Did Nike control its message to be the brand that people identify with third-world sweatshops and exploitation of cheap labor?


[QUOTE=Brock Poling]It takes constant maintenance and adjustment, but it can be done. You can use advertising to *communicate* your brand message, but you can't build a brand on advertising.   This may seem like semantics, but there is a profound difference.
[/QUOTE]

I agree with you Brock, and that's what I was saying with my example. But in working with clients over the years, I have encountered a number of companies and marketing people who equate branding with advertising. My message was that is not the case. So I am not really sure why you are arguing with me.



[QUOTE=Brock Poling]Brands are not built on advertising... They are built on the whole experience. You have to look @ EVERYTHING you do with an eye on brand. It touches everything.
[/QUOTE]

Hence my message to "Be the brand."

My belief it that the concept of branding, as it has become known today, is really a ruse developed by consultants so they can charge high fees to tell clients to do the following:

1. Pick something you are good at.
2. Do it well.
3. Tell people about it.
4. Guard and protect your reputation carefully.

That's branding broken down to four easy steps. But, it is hard to charge thousands of dollars in consulting fees to tell someone that.


Jim

[QUOTE=Hesh1956]Um - I think that you guys might just be in violent agreement. I took Jim to be saying that Branding "includes" all that you do including of course advertising and not that branding is conducted by advertising.


[/QUOTE]

That is exactly what I said, Hesh.

Jim

[QUOTE=Hesh1956]
......If we are the brand, and I agree that we most certainly are this has come full circle and returned to the idea that we are all selling ourselves - always.
....[/QUOTE]

Brings to mind a quote I heard, can't remember who coined it. Something like: To build a better guitar, be a better person. Rather nebulous, but something I try to keep in mind.

If we are to BE our brand, then it really does extrapolate, or perhaps interplote, to being a better person. I think much of our motivation to build guitars, make art, or engage in anything we feel driven and passionate about comes from within.

_________________
now known around here as Pat Foster
_________________
http://www.patfosterguitars.com

[QUOTE=burbank]To build a better guitar, be a better person.[/QUOTE]

TJ Thompson

_________________
Tickle your guitar daily, and it'll tickle you back.

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel]There are far too many people in business today -- as well as far too many books, magazines and consultants -- who believe that you can create a brand by advertising.[/quote]

Ok. My bad. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I didn't immediately pick up on the fact that you were quoting what others thought. My mistake. I agree with your points.

But I **DID** say that clearly you "get it" in the opening line of my remarks.   

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel]And that's because of the fact that customers create your brand identity. You do not.[/quote]

I disagree with this, but I suspect we are picking at nits. I concede that you don't have total control and it is hard to have a precise cause and effect strategy. But with a good understanding of who you are, what your brand is, a committment to your brand values, and a solid communication plan you CAN control it. But it needs constant attention.

As far as the Nike thing goes. I think these things can **sometimes** strengthen a brand. Not because the companies get egg on their faces, but in how they choose to address the problems. Sometimes a company rises even higher by admitting their screw up and doing the right thing. (I have no idea what Nike did when that happened... that is a tough problem. But take the Tylenol contamination -- they didn't complain or get defensive. They demonstrated their committment to the public health by pulling every bottle of the product off the shelves. THAT underscored the brand. That was beautifully executed.)

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel] Hence my message to "Be the brand."My belief it that the concept of branding, as it has become known today, is really a ruse developed by consultants so they can charge high fees to tell clients to do the following:

1. Pick something you are good at.
2. Do it well.
3. Tell people about it.
4. Guard and protect your reputation carefully.

That's branding broken down to four easy steps. But, it is hard to charge thousands of dollars in consulting fees to tell someone that.
Jim[/QUOTE]

What were John Getty's rules to success?

1. Get up early
2. Work hard
3. Strike oil.




Sure, you're right. That is pretty much it, but that is not a simple process.. especially for a large company.

I don't know if I would say brand consulting is a ruse.

Sometimes... scratch that... most of the time... companies spend so much time breathing their own air that they totally lose sight of the outside world.

These consultants can tell a CEO that "We provide world class products to discriminating clients at a competitive price." means absolutely nothing. (If he believes it, it is tough for the employees to tell him that if they want upward mobility in their careers.)

Sometimes the consultant helps to facilitate a process of introspection and challenges the executives to really find that special something that they can hang thair hat on. Then it becomes partly a process of "giving them religion" and educating them on what to do.

That is a lot of work. I know why it is expensive.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

If you truly believe you have a product that will sell, then I would suggest you invest in yourself by taking some excellent university courses in finance, small business and marketing. 80% of small businesses fail in the first year. 95% of the remaining businesses fail within the next 5 years. The most prominent cause is lack of knowledge in how to succeed. All universities and colleges offer the information needed to succeed; you just need to invest the time, money and energy to learn those skills. This is not a guarantee to succeed, but at least you’ll be able to start on the right foot.

Here’s something I’ll throw out as “food-for-thought”:

The materials to make a good guitar - $500.00 - $1,000.00
Labour @ minimum wage for 200 hours - $2,000.00
The skills to build one – priceless (Branding)

With these ingredients, you will have a completed guitar that costs approximately $3,000.00
You will want to brand your company name/logo to as many people as possible (your “niche market”) and market it at as low a cost as possible.

Find a musician(s) that you believe is/are up and coming but not in the big scene yet. Someone who is performing 50 – 100 gigs a year at coffee houses, clubs etc and drawing sizable crowds (50 – 100). This will result in about 5000 – 10,000 people seeing your guitar in talented hands (branding) each year. In monetary terms, this can be translated into an investment of $5.00 per person. That’s what I call inexpensive adverting, marketing and branding.

Oh did I mention, you should also give the guitar to the artist. You risk losing $2,000.00, however, this is a small price to pay for a product you believe is good.

_________________
Michael Lloyd

“I was born to ignorance, yes, and lesser poverties ...
I was born to privilege that I did not see ... I didn’t know it, but my way was paved” – John Gorka

You should NOT give products to artists unless they really do something for you. It must be quid pro quo or they will not value the instrument and the association.

I've sold Lindsey Buckingham twenty instruments...maybe it's twenty two. I can't keep track. I gave him one.   That's like giving him a 5% discount. Lindsey has featured my guitars in videos, the cover of one of his solo albums, and he's mentioned me, my guitars, and our long association in interview after interview.

Does Delta or Powermatic give any of us band saws? I could use a few new Bosch laminate trimmers, and I'll endorse them...

I've been an artist relations pro. I opened Gibson's West Coast A/R office in 1988, and my very job was giving instruments away.   A few Les Pauls mean nothing to Gibson...though I did sign Guns 'n' Roses. I've also seen a lot of endorsement whores come and go. A free instrument turns into drug money pretty quickly out there...Yes, I've seen it. A formerly 300 pound Les Paul Jr. player was famous for it...

To a luthier, a guitar is a significant portion of a year's work.   That means a lot.   For instance, the worst case I can think of is Michael Hornick.   He gives a guitar away every year at Telluride...and he only makes about six to eight a year.   That's his right, but that represents a huge advertising budget by any reasonable standards.   I certainly could not afford to give away 15% of my year's work to let only 12,000 people know about me...

"You should NOT give products to artists unless they really do something for you. It must be quid pro quo or they will not value the instrument and the association."


Agreed! I'm all about planning for the future, but at some point you have to do the math. I've sold $185,000 in instruments over the past two years through my site. Profit margin isn't great, so an endorsement deal like a free guitar (let's say $3k worth) is going to have to bring in a TON of future business to be anything close to worthwhile.

I don't build guitars (yet), so I realize my business model is different, but like a one man shop, once the next few instruments are spoken for, having more folks come to the site is great publicity, but that doesn't translate to cash in hand. Waiting lists are great and all, but they can trap you into a transaction that's not really profitable enough to be worth your while when you rightfully feel like you should be getting more for your guitars.

As others have said, having a James Taylor playing your instruments in public can clearly result in a huge shift in demand. But be careful when it's a B-level musician just looking to supplement their income with swag!


Andrew

[QUOTE=Rick Turner] You should NOT give products to artists unless they really do something for you. It must be quid pro quo or they will not value the instrument and the association.[/QUOTE]

I'll agree with that. I've been approached a couple of times for an instrument but the player said that "at this point in my career, I don't pay for instruments" This person already had a endorsement deal with another luthier and could only perhaps play my guitars in concert but not say anything about them in print or in the media. I declined to participate. Ya gotta get something for your trouble. Rick, I'm sure you got some mileage from Mr Buckingham but that just didn't seem to be true in my case. I have talked to a couple other luthiers that had similar experiences with other musisians and declined. I wouldn't have a problem with it if I was getting something real for my time.

_________________
Tickle your guitar daily, and it'll tickle you back.

I have that very thing facing me right now. A local artist that does about 300 gigs a year has contacted me and wants me to build him a guitar. I really feel that the guy will make it to the big time and I want to help him. I want him to help me too.

He heard about me through one of my steel string clients who is pleased with his guitar. It was his reccomendations that brought the new artist/client to me.

I dont think I am going to give him a guitar, but I am going to negotiate a bargain with him where I at least wont loose money. In return, he mentions my guitar at every gig. should be a win/win situation for both of us.

 

_________________
Reguards,

Ken H

Another approach re. artist relations instruments, prefaced by a situation none of us would like...

I know three very good guitarists, one with a major international reputation and two more local who got guitars from Jeff Traugott back when artist deals could be had for under $5,000.00...well under.   Two of these artists wound up in expensive divorces, and one bought a house here in Santa Cruz. Guess where big chunks of money came from... Yes, the rapid inflation of market value for Jeff's wonderful guitars...Jeff did not share in that increased value.

So here are a couple of ideas:

1)   Don't give guitars away; loan them long term with a contract in which you retain ownership, but the artist gets to use the guitar as long as they play it at least much of the time in live concerts, they give CD cover credit to you, and they put you and a link to your website on their own site. The artist must carry insurance and be legally responsible for the care and well being of the instrument.

Win/Win...The guitar remains an asset for you or your company; the artist gets to do everything an owner might do other than sell the guitar.

2)   You sell the instrument to the artist with the proviso that should the artist ever sell the instrument, that you will get half of the net profit on it, but not ever be responsible if the instrument is sold at a loss.   You can also put in a clause that gives you first right of refusal to buy the instrument back at whatever you sold it for minus wear and tear.

Don't be giving the store away!

On the issue of loss leaders, it's always a tough one to call.

The problem with them is this - if you give away an instrument then the message you are giving is that this guitar is something which either a) isn't worth all that much or b) you are making enough profit on all the ones you're selling that you can afford to give instruments away (which suggests A).

It won't help your brand perception, and it definately won't help your bank balance. Just think of all those other 'struggling artists' who will approach you with their poverty stories and when you give them a price will be hammerring it down with 'but you gave one to XXXX'.

Of course there are exceptions here as with anything else in marketing.

Gibson could afford to do it as no one was under any illusions that the product they gave away was less than a percent of a percent of their annual production output.

Equally, if I were to become any good at this luthierie milarkey, I have an old schoolfriend who's band is about to release their debut UK single in a couple of weeks. I've known the guy nearly all my life and if they were to become successful and I were to give him an instrument it would be percieved as a friend-to-friend present, not a vendor-to-customer gift.

And on the subject of people wanting that 'old school luthier' image - well I can't comment on proportions, but I do want to reiterate what I said about mirroring. If an ex-CEO comes to you and is brusque, matter of fact and lacking in persomal pronouns, then you increase your chances of a sale by being the same. Sure; that may not gel with the 'old school luthier' image, but not everyone will buy into that image emotionally. Just a thought...

We do limited endorsement deals with musicians we like and whom we feel will represent us well, and we sell the guitars and basses to them at wholesale prices...the same we'd get from a dealer. My best endorsing clients are players like Lindsey, Henry Kaiser, Colin Hay (Men at Work), Stephen Bruton, Janet Robin (you'll hear about her...), Ezra Idlet (Trout Fishing in America) and the like. They're working pros who not only want to succeed in the music biz, but they also want us to succeed because we make damned good instruments that make their jobs easier. With many of them, it's a very mutual collaboration, and they help me to develop new instruments.   That was certainly the case with Lindsey; his comments were directly responsible for my developing the Model 1 guitar.   And now I'm working with Janet Robin (who played guitar in one of LB's solo project bands) on developing a magnetic/piezo hybrid version of my RS6 guitar.   

So for me, my best endorsers are also design collaborators, and I really like working with them...and they with me. So for me, a lot of this is not me trying to get them to play my guitar; it's us developing new instruments, new models of existing instruments, and in some cases, inventing solutions to problems that guitarists deal with on stage, on the road, in the studio.

So, no, I don't see this as a necessary evil...because, for one thing, I'm getting paid for endorsed instruments. I'm in a win/win with my artists. I never grovel (as I've seen some luthiers do); I don't give things away (as I've seen some luthiers do, and as I was paid to do by Gibson); and if I sense the slightest bit of inequality in the artist/luthier relationship, I'm outta there. I consider myself to be an absolute equal to any of the rock stars I've worked with, and they respect me for that. They appreciate that I endorse their playing as much as I appreciate that they endorse my guitars.   This has worked for me for a good 37 years now.

Don't put yourself in a one-down position to move your instruments...

[QUOTE=Jim Samuel] Hence my message to "Be the brand."My belief it that the concept of branding, as it has become known today, is really a ruse developed by consultants so they can charge high fees to tell clients to do the following:

1. Pick something you are good at.
2. Do it well.
3. Tell people about it.
4. Guard and protect your reputation carefully.

That's branding broken down to four easy steps. But, it is hard to charge thousands of dollars in consulting fees to tell someone that.
Jim[/QUOTE]

This states what Michael Gerber calls "The E Myth" in his series of books (which he has built into his own industry by repeating a few simple things over and over in different formats). The belief in this myth, he says is the reason most small businesses fail. Doing something you do well and telling people about it is not running a business; conversely, running a business has nothing to do with being good at making the product.

Branding is only one part of marketing, of course. In the guitar market, it mainly involves placing an ad and running it for a long time (like years), and showing up for exhibitions and festivals for a long time (like years), and not expecting sales to be very hot before a few years of this have gone by. This assumes you have a quality instrument to offer. Unless your cousin or sister-in-law is a really famous (like big concert hall) player, you're not going to get jump started by an endorsement. Even then, your cousin or sister-in-law is likely already contracted to someone else.

On the point of artists, I too have been approached by a somewhat well-known, regularly-gigging-but-not-to-big-concert-halls player, who suggested that if I gave him a free guitar, he would play it on gigs, even though he is under contract to publicly endorse a different guitar. I was not interested.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.