What's new

DE "Conspiracy Theory"

Wook

Wook

Perhaps someone can tell me if this is true.

I had read that Gillette and others chose to deliberately bury the DE starting in the 70s and replace it with the inferior cartridge razor, knowingly and for economic reasons. Since DE blades are so generic they cannot be patented meaning there was huge competition amongst manufacturers driving down prices.

Whereas the "Gillette Supernova Mongoose XVIII" style of marketing allows profit margins in the region of 1500% per heavily marketed and patented blade.

Is there any truth in this? And if so, it seems to display a rather large amount of contempt for their customers, no? The original Mr. Gillette would be appalled, I'm sure.
 
RexHavoc

RexHavoc

Is there any truth in this? And if so, it seems to display a rather large amount of contempt for their customers, no? The original Mr. Gillette would be appalled, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

I don't think he would, it seems so be an outgrowth of his original business plan.
 
Wook

Wook

RexHavoc said:
I don't think he would, it seems so be an outgrowth of his original business plan.
Click to expand...

I dunno. Sure he invented the concept of a razor that required repeated purchases of blades, but he also provided something that gave a good shave and was more convenient than the straight razor.

It is quite another to knowingly sell something that provides an inferior shave and causes more irritation, all the while claiming it to be superior.

I don't think King Gillette ever needed to lie to sell his razors.
 
goby

goby

Wook said:
Perhaps someone can tell me if this is true.

I had read that Gillette and others chose to deliberately bury the DE starting in the 70s and replace it with the inferior cartridge razor, knowingly and for economic reasons. Since DE blades are so generic they cannot be patented meaning there was huge competition amongst manufacturers driving down prices.

Whereas the "Gillette Supernova Mongoose XVIII" style of marketing allows profit margins in the region of 1500% per heavily marketed and patented blade.

Is there any truth in this? And if so, it seems to display a rather large amount of contempt for their customers, no? The original Mr. Gillette would be appalled, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

No, King Gillette would be proud! He developed one of the most important business models in the history of business. He sold his razors at near cost, then he charged a lot for the blades. He sold the razors for cheap to the US Army during WWI and WWII, and every soldier came home having used Gillette razors.

Actually blades can be patented. The greatest blade ever is the Personna 74, a blade so amazing that I have got 21 shaves out of one blade. In fact, I'm going to try to use one blade for the entire month of February. One member got 31 shaves from the blade and could of got even more out of that blade.

Gillette's response to the Personna 74 was the Trac II blade, ending the reign of the DE and beginning the age of the cartridge.
 
mmack66

mmack66

I don't see any conspiracy in the OP. It is no secret. That is what happened. I am sure that Gillette figured out that the best way to secure their future would be to create a razor system that used proprietary blades that were able to be patented. King Gillette would probably be upset that he didn't think of the idea sooner. With prices adjusted for inflation, the price of cartridges isn't a whole lot different than the price of DE blades were.
 
82R100

82R100

If the cartridges were so inferior, how did Gillette convince the public to drop the DE blades en masse and switch over? I submit that people consciously left the DE razors behind.

- Chris
 
Last edited:
funkyb

funkyb

mmack66 said:
.With prices adjusted for inflation, the price of cartridges isn't a whole lot different than the price of DE blades were.
Click to expand...

What is your source for this claim?

Since DE blades are presently over an order of magnitude cheaper than cartridges, if what you say is true, on an inflation-adjusted-basis dollar, it implies cartridges would have been over 10x cheaper in the past without DE blades being any cheaper, or the opposite, that DE blades would have been over 10x more expensive without cartridges being any more expensive (relatively speaking and in any basis-year dollars).
 
Last edited:
82R100

82R100

funkyb said:
What is your source for this claim?

Since DE blades are presently over an order of magnitude cheaper than cartridges, if what you say is true, on an inflation-adjusted-basis dollar, it implies cartridges would have been over 10x cheaper in the past without DE blades being any cheaper, or the opposite, that DE blades would have been over 10x more expensive without cartridges being any more expensive (relatively speaking and in any basis-year dollars).
Click to expand...

No, it specifically says that cartridges now are not much more expensive than DE blades were (adjusted for inflation).
 
sandmountainslim

sandmountainslim

jpkunst said:
Trac II (GII) cartridges are not inferior to DE blades.
Click to expand...

The Trac II is a great razor and I love mine and use it for B.O.N. shaving about once per week.
To me personally the T2 head is harder to fit and shave directly under my nose so I do consider it inferior to my Old Type dimensionally. Otherwise I see your point and it is a great razor and far better than anything mfg since.
Wp
 
muskokabrian

muskokabrian

I think at the time there were a lot of compelling reasons to switch from the DE. The early 70's were not about quality but about convenience. In my house, our perkolator was quickly replaced with instant coffee. We had an electric can opener. If a product could be made disposable, we got it.

Generally there were less conveniences back then... it was the start so the loss of quality in ones shave was weighed against having more disposable time and thus more quality time to do other things, enhancing the overall quality of ones life.

Trac 2's looked cool as well, especially compared to those old metal things. Plastics were fairly new and so plastic things looked pretty cool. Hi tech. It was kind of space age like the stuff they were making at NASA for the Apollo missions.

I don't think it was so much a conspiracy but a well executed buisiness plan. They gave the consumer what the consumer wanted. In fact, it was no more of a conspiracy to bury DE razors than the blackberry was to kill off manual daytimers.

Having said all that... the move to 3, 4 and 5 blade cartridges... was a way to stop the generic producers. You used to see lot's of compatible cartridges but none for Fusion.
 
Sterling Cooper

Sterling Cooper

This has always intrigued me as a great subject for some young doctoral candidate in business history to base his dissertation on. I believe the follow up book would have some general interest beyond other historians and the die hard shave community.
 
natchez

natchez

Business is all about profits. The King himself would probably be on TV advertising this new stuff if he were alive. Maybe he would have even hired Tiger Woods as a spokesman, if he thought it would boost sales- quicker shave more time for the women. :ohmy:

The new products require: less skill, less preparation, less time, are even for the average guy actually more forgiving and they have much higher profit margins. A dream come true in our disposable society.

The fact that the DE safety razor is a fine tool was merely a byproduct of the times in which it was made and sold. Things needed to be well made as folks bought and kept them for a long time. It was more dear to part with the money. I am just pleased that Gillette kept making quality products into the 1960s, so there are many surviving examples that we collectively can use.

So, IMO I think King Gillette would not be rolling over in his grave in grief, but rather applauding the efforts his managerial successors.
 
djh

djh

Just think of all of the brushes, soaps, after shaves and scuttles that he could have bought with profit margins like that!
 
CCMphysician

CCMphysician

82R100 said:
No, it specifically says that cartridges now are not much more expensive than DE blades were (adjusted for inflation).
Click to expand...

Lets see if this is true. I have a pack of razor blades from 1914. It contains five blades and the box is marked for $0.50. If I adjust for the CPI-U using 1914 as my start point, today it would cost $10.73 for those blades.

Do what you will with the numbers,
CCM
 
luvmysuper

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
CCMphysician said:
Lets see if this is true. I have a pack of razor blades from 1914. It contains five blades and the box is marked for $0.50. If I adjust for the CPI-U using 1914 as my start point, today it would cost $10.73 for those blades.

Do what you will with the numbers,
CCM
Click to expand...

10.73 for 5 DE blades at todays price.
7.75 for 4 Cart Blades at todays price.
That's $1.94 per blade for the cart and $2.15 a blade for the DE

What am I missing?
 
jpkunst

jpkunst

sandmountainslim said:
The Trac II is a great razor and I love mine and use it for B.O.N. shaving about once per week.
To me personally the T2 head is harder to fit and shave directly under my nose so I do consider it inferior to my Old Type dimensionally. Otherwise I see your point and it is a great razor and far better than anything mfg since.
Wp
Click to expand...

I prefer to use a Super Adjustable myself (to me, it's slightly more comfortable to use than a GII, and it's cheaper). I only use my GII when traveling.

A GII provides a great shave in about half the time a DE does (give or take), and for most that is a big advantage for the GII. I personally feel a DE is a bit more comfortable, but I'm sure that for many there is no difference and for others the GII might be more comfortable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom