First 55,000 double rings

[elmerwood]

Does anyone know where the number 55,000 came from? I have a add from a magazine in 1904 and it claims "26,481 enthusiastic users of the "Gillette" since January 1st, 1904." I'm assuming that since June is in the middle of our calendar year that they just took this number and doubled it?
Here is my copy of my add.

 

[ERVARGASNY]

You got me there /

I have heard the Term as first 55,000 but never knew where it came from.

I am Sure Porter or Alex can answer this one )

 

[MacDaddy]

I'm not sure what the original source is for that number, off the top of my head. I'd swear that I remember reading some account, perhaps by Nickerson, that mentioned it, but I could be completely making that up. It could have been someone's (Krumholz's?) attempt at reverse engineering a guess from the various sales figures we have from different sources. I just grabbed my copy to check, and Krumholz does say that the 55K number was Gillette's estimate.

It's worth pointing out here, too, that Krumholz does specifically say that the serial number ranges for the years up to and including 1908 are estimates based on sales figures and observed examples, rather than on any original record of Gillette's. That's why all the serial number ranges for the years leading up to 1908 end in "424" -- he was estimating by the 1000s and somewhere that "424" number got introduced... maybe that was his lowest observed Double Ring serial with a patent date at the time he wrote his book?

In any case, we can take a look at what other numbers we do have some kind of source for. The Silver Jubilee Issue of the Gillette Blade lists the total sales for 1904 at 90,844 razors:



However, in an earlier issue of the Blade (January 1919) Nickerson includes counts on shipments for each month from January through August of 1904 which only total 20,007 sets:



So, either they're counting two different things there ("sales" vs. "shipments" -- which might also account for the 51 "sales" in 1903 when Nickerson says that the first commercial shipment was in January of '04), or Gillette massively ramped up production starting in September in order to get from 20K to nearly 91K, or one or the other or both sets of numbers aren't quite right.

Another thing to factor in here is that, from observed examples, we know that the serial numbering started before the patent date started being stamped. I think we've placed the switchover in the patent stamping somewhere in the vicinity of the 20K serial number mark, if I'm remembering correctly. (Krumholz estimated this switchover to have been at 25,424, but I'm reasonably sure we've seen earlier numbers than that with the date stamp.)

Now, I think it's pretty reasonable to believe that the switchover in the patent stamp happened not long after the patent was issued if not nearly immediately, so if we do a little math...

A = number of razors produced before serial numbering
B = number of razors produced after serial numbering, but before patent date stamp
C = number of razors produced after patent date stamp, but before Jan 1, 1905
D = total production up through 1904

A + B + C = D
​

If we assume the 55K number is roughly correct (A = 55,000) and that D is in the neighborhood of 91K that leaves 36K razors to be allocated between B and C, which seems totally reasonable -- B being somewhere around 20K would leave only around 16K for December and some part of November, which seems well within reach using Nickerson's monthly numbers as a gauge of what their typical production might have been.

 

[elmerwood]

Porter, thanks for the response. I'm sure you've seen another add from 1905 that claims "References: Any one of our 168,141 satisfied users to January 1,1905, our first year in the market" Are "users" owners of individual razors? So many holes....

 

[MacDaddy]

Porter, thanks for the response. I'm sure you've seen another add from 1905 that claims "References: Any one of our 168,141 satisfied users to January 1,1905, our first year in the market" Are "users" owners of individual razors? So many holes....

Yeah, that number seems way too high to be feasible for razor sales. They could be counting men of shaving age in households that had purchased a Gillette as "users" but I can't imagine that they'd have any real way to know that, or even make much of an educated guess.

 

[alex2363]

i think we will never be sure about the real production amount of non serial numbered dr =(

I agree, but atleast we can have an educated estimate.

 

[KQY61]

Hi,

Sounds like a carnival game:

Carny Barker: pick a number between 1 and 168,141!

Me: 55,000!

Barker: We have a winna!!



Stan

 

[shavefreak]

Krumholtz in his book says "Keep in mind that this serial number reference is only estimated throughout the years 1903 -1908, and numbers are based on annual sales records and review of serial numbers on actual razors by the Gillette company" page 124

He also says "Gillette estimates...." the 55k