Gillette Company History Geek Out

[shavefreak]

Well I found this from March 1904 so that can't be 1903 can it?

 

[shavefreak]

I think the ads in system might not be in order, the above post went back to January but the article next to this ad was not mentioned in the index page. Posting a screen shot below. If you read the article next to it talking about the end of 1903 it would put the ad in December which is still later than Picker.

 

[MacDaddy]

You posted that ad the one I put in from Picker in some past posts, nothing we have not seen but I thought is was October 1903? I saved it and looked expecting it to say 20 blades and the one above being 12 but they are the same. The one he put as November was the one I thought was October.

Well I found this from March 1904 so that can't be 1903 can it?

No, the ones I'd clipped from System were all 1904. The 1903 issues don't appear to be freely available in digitized form, that I can find.

Since things seem to be getting a bit confused, I've put this list together of some of these earliest ads:

Date	# of Blades	Mailing Address	Source
1903-10	20	Unknown	System, as cited by Picker in "The Razors-and-Blades Myth(s)" (as yet unverified)
1903-11	12	160?-3 Manhattan Building (scan is unclear)	System, as cited by Picker in "The Razors-and-Blades Myth(s)" (as yet unverified)
1904-01	20	1605-6 Manhattan Building	System
1904-02	20	???? Manhattan Building (illegible)	Emmet County Magazine
1904-03	20	1636 Manhattan Building	Emmet County Magazine
1904-03	20	1208 Manhattan Building	System
1904-03	20	1203 Manhattan Building	Outing
1904-04	20	1636 Manhattan Building	Emmet County Magazine
1904-04	20	1211 Manhattan Building	Recreation
1904-04	20	1208 Manhattan Building	System
1904-05	20	1208 Manhattan Building	System
1904-06	12	1208 Manhattan Building	System

 

[MacDaddy]

I think the ads in system might not be in order, the above post went back to January but the article next to this ad was not mentioned in the index page. Posting a screen shot below. If you read the article next to it talking about the end of 1903 it would put the ad in December which is still later than Picker.

It's probably a very safe assumption that the January issue of the magazine was delivered during December (as is typical practice with magazines even today) and so would have been prepared well prior. So it's not terribly surprising to see people writing about the end of the year as something that's still approaching. Also, Volume 5, which that issue was a part of only covers January 1904 to June 1904, so the chances of that being from the December 1903 issue are pretty darn slim.

 

[mblakele]

For some reason the November 1903 issue of System is difficult to find on google books. I have reported this problem to google, but a link appears in the wiki on the Gillette Timeline page. It advertised 12 blades, and the other half of the page shows a detachable leaf ledger. Click on the image for the entire google books document.

 

[coolbus18]

Thanks so much because I am so enjoying reading the marvelous collections of the history of Gillette. I followed a link ,Porter, put up and have been reading the Gillette Blade(click for great story) this evening. The pictures alone are great , or reading about ,Mr.Shaver(real name), that worked at Gillette, Canada. I also really like the story about a Gillette saving a soldiers life. Enjoy!!

 

[Chadao]

Wow, this is a great idea. I am ready to learn.

 

[shavefreak]

Yup, The January index has a copyright of 1903. I thought that was an article next to the ad and it was not listed in the index but the article is actually a want ad not an article, that threw me off. It is a December 1903 published issue for January 1904.

It's probably a very safe assumption that the January issue of the magazine was delivered during December (as is typical practice with magazines even today) and so would have been prepared well prior. So it's not terribly surprising to see people writing about the end of the year as something that's still approaching. Also, Volume 5, which that issue was a part of only covers January 1904 to June 1904, so the chances of that being from the December 1903 issue are pretty darn slim.

 

[MacDaddy]

For some reason the November 1903 issue of System is difficult to find on google books. I have reported this problem to google, but a link appears in the wiki on the Gillette Timeline page. It advertised 12 blades, and the other half of the page shows a detachable leaf ledger.

Good one! It looks like Google filed it under the magazine's tagline (which I don't see appear until a few years later) "The Magazine of Business" for some reason, instead of "System." In any case, that's definitely a confirmation. I can also make out the address in their scan better than in Picker's paper, and it looks like it's "1602-3 Manhattan Building" instead of the "1605-6" that they used in the January issue. That has to have been some sort of tracking hack they were using.

Incidentally, knowing what to look for I was able to turn up the October 1903 issue of System, too, with the first ad in it. It's pictured in Krumholz's book, but now we can see it (somewhat) firsthand and in context:

 

[shavefreak]

Man I was looking for that and forgot where I saw it. Interesting on the case as this looks like it is after the tin, It is the ribbon case with the hinge on the wrong side, they had not put it all together yet. The gold razor "Will be" They had not made any yet. I wonder if the tin pre-dates October 1903.

Good one! It looks like Google filed it under the magazine's tagline (which I don't see appear until a few years later) "The Magazine of Business" for some reason, instead of "System." In any case, that's definitely a confirmation. I can also make out the address in their scan better than in Picker's paper, and it looks like it's "1602-3 Manhattan Building" instead of the "1605-6" that they used in the January issue. That has to have been some sort of tracking hack they were using.

Incidentally, knowing what to look for I was able to turn up the October 1903 issue of System, too, with the first ad in it. It's pictured in Krumholz's book, but now we can see it (somewhat) firsthand and in context:

 

[MacDaddy]

Interesting on the case as this looks like it is after the tin, It is the ribbon case with the hinge on the wrong side, they had not put it all together yet.

That early on it's possible that it was just a spec illustration done by a case manufacturer that may have never been made.

I wonder if the tin pre-dates October 1903.

Or, you know, they could have, perhaps, just been made simultaneously and, maybe, been used for orders requested directly from the manufacturer rather than through the sales company...

 

[shavefreak]

The case looks just like the leather cases with the snap and hinges moved, the blade holders were set closer to the edge but it looks like they modified it after they figured the weight of a vertical opening would beat on those hinges. It also mentions the booklet which was something to write in for. The tins had the instructions on the tin lid so there was no need for the book a later idea. As fast as those tins were ordered they must have started on new packaging. I think they called them "shells" back then if I recall from "the blade".

That early on it's possible that it was just a spec illustration done by a case manufacturer that may have never been made.



Or, you know, they could have, perhaps, just been made simultaneously and, maybe, been used for orders requested directly from the manufacturer rather than through the sales company...

 

[thekinge]

A very engaging discussion and I'd love to read the Google books link that has been shared by Porter & mblakele but unfortunately Google's content restriction classifies these eBooks as US only so I can't view / download them. Can someone help by hosting in their dropbox account so that non-CONUS members can download them for their reading pleasure?

 

[mblakele]

That early on it's possible that it was just a spec illustration done by a case manufacturer that may have never been made.

I agree, and there are other odd things in that October 1903 Townsend & Hunt ad. The blade holes look smallish. The razor is "made of silver" - not "triple silver" as in the November 1903 Gillette ad. Thanks for the link: it certainly deserves a spot in the timeline.

We have notes from Nickerson of the 2 July 1903 board meeting, when the "original agreement" with Townsend & Hunt was discussed: "before Nov. 1st, 500 sets...". The title page of the October 1903 System says that it was published on the 10th of each month. I wonder if we could find out when the ad copy deadline was? It seems likely that Townsend & Hunt created that advertisement without having a single razor or blade on hand, while counting on 500 to arrive by the first of November. One can only imagine their consternation if, as suggested by Nickerson, they did not receive the first sets until early January 1904.

 

[shavefreak]

Which ad are you calling the November 1903?

I agree, and there are other odd things in that October 1903 Townsend & Hunt ad. The blade holes look smallish. The razor is "made of silver" - not "triple silver" as in the November 1903 Gillette ad. Thanks for the link: it certainly deserves a spot in the timeline.

We have notes from Nickerson of the 2 July 1903 board meeting, when the "original agreement" with Townsend & Hunt was discussed: "before Nov. 1st, 500 sets...". The title page of the October 1903 System says that it was published on the 10th of each month. I wonder if we could find out when the ad copy deadline was? It seems likely that Townsend & Hunt created that advertisement without having a single razor or blade on hand, while counting on 500 to arrive by the first of November. One can only imagine their consternation if, as suggested by Nickerson, they did not receive the first sets until early January 1904.

 

[shavefreak]

Well in the "Blade" it said Townshend had no shortage of demand and mentioned the large numbers they were prepared to take. With (and IF) 51 sets sold in 1903 and they had all that demand add to it that the January production orders were really strong it does make sense that 1903 orders were comming in and the supply might not have been ready for these ads.

I agree, and there are other odd things in that October 1903 Townsend & Hunt ad. The blade holes look smallish. The razor is "made of silver" - not "triple silver" as in the November 1903 Gillette ad. Thanks for the link: it certainly deserves a spot in the timeline.

We have notes from Nickerson of the 2 July 1903 board meeting, when the "original agreement" with Townsend & Hunt was discussed: "before Nov. 1st, 500 sets...". The title page of the October 1903 System says that it was published on the 10th of each month. I wonder if we could find out when the ad copy deadline was? It seems likely that Townsend & Hunt created that advertisement without having a single razor or blade on hand, while counting on 500 to arrive by the first of November. One can only imagine their consternation if, as suggested by Nickerson, they did not receive the first sets until early January 1904.

 

[mblakele]

Which ad are you calling the November 1903?

This one, as cited by Gillette Timeline "1903 - November - First advertising appears". I will have to reconsider that phrasing in light of the Townsend & Hunt ad.

For some reason the November 1903 issue of System is difficult to find on google books. I have reported this problem to google, but a link appears in the wiki on the Gillette Timeline page. It advertised 12 blades, and the other half of the page shows a detachable leaf ledger. Click on the image for the entire google books document.

Well in the "Blade" it said Townshend had no shortage of demand and mentioned the large numbers they were prepared to take. With (and IF) 51 sets sold in 1903 and they had all that demand add to it that the January production orders were really strong it does make sense that 1903 orders were comming in and the supply might not have been ready for these ads.

Yes, and Nickerson mentions all the pressure he was under to get the razors and blades into production. There is good evidence for strong demand in late 1903, but little evidence of supply. Those first 50 or 51 sets might simply be an artifact of accounting. Nickerson says "Jan 1st 1904" and that was a Friday. The razors might have been packed and ready to go late on Thursday, and so perhaps booked as sold in 1903. There might have been 51 ready, but it was more convenient or economical to ship 50 and carry the last one over to the next shipment. However that is all just speculation. The discrepancy could just as easily be a typo.

 

[alex2363]

This one, as cited by Gillette Timeline "1903 - November - First advertising appears". I will have to reconsider that phrasing in light of the Townsend & Hunt ad.





Yes, and Nickerson mentions all the pressure he was under to get the razors and blades into production. There is good evidence for strong demand in late 1903, but little evidence of supply. Those first 50 or 51 sets might simply be an artifact of accounting. Nickerson says "Jan 1st 1904" and that was a Friday. The razors might have been packed and ready to go late on Thursday, and so perhaps booked as sold in 1903. There might have been 51 ready, but it was more convenient or economical to ship 50 and carry the last one over to the next shipment. However that is all just speculation. The discrepancy could just as easily be a typo.

Yes, Nickerson was pressured constantlty by Joyce to get production going but it was not a factor, in fact Nickerson thrived under pressure. Joyce main concern was that he already had invested alot of his money to bail Gillette out of near bankruptcy, and he did not want another financial failure like with the ill fated New Era Carbonation machine ( wich Gillette and Joyce invested in and lost money on). Joyce wanted to succeed so he gave another $8,500 to tool up production, add a 2nd sharpening machine and move to larger space on 2nd floor of 394 Atlantic ave. Nckerson finished it by mid April.

 

[alex2363]

This one, as cited by Gillette Timeline "1903 - November - First advertising appears". I will have to reconsider that phrasing in light of the Townsend & Hunt ad.





Yes, and Nickerson mentions all the pressure he was under to get the razors and blades into production. There is good evidence for strong demand in late 1903, but little evidence of supply. Those first 50 or 51 sets might simply be an artifact of accounting. Nickerson says "Jan 1st 1904" and that was a Friday. The razors might have been packed and ready to go late on Thursday, and so perhaps booked as sold in 1903. There might have been 51 ready, but it was more convenient or economical to ship 50 and carry the last one over to the next shipment. However that is all just speculation. The discrepancy could just as easily be a typo.

The 1st advertisement was in October 1903 in the System Magazine, they had a half page ad the read" We offer a New razor" by Townsend and hunt.

 

[alex2363]

Thanks Dirt Diver

Hmmmm In the northwestern piece he pointed out the October 1903 systems ad had 20 blades and the November ad had 12 blades. 51 sets sold in 1903. So they decided to reduce to 12 blades in just the one month if I read that correctly? I wonder if after the tins if they put 12 blades in the sharp box, 0 in the dull or 6 and 6? All my complete double and single ring sets with original blades have some in both boxes but of course none sealed in a shipper.

I held a complete litho tin set and it had 20 blades so this ad would confirm 1903 pre Novmeber sale. It is highly possible only 51 or so tin sets went out 1903. People kept tins around for holding stuff back then and more of them should be around. Even Gillette factory workers had 25 of them for screws and parts in the factory for years until a collector pulled them out. Many of the 25 had holes in them being nailed up and I also heard some had blue paint on one side. If Gillette went from 20 to 12 blades in in one month in 1903 that means they were struggling with costs. The litho tin and the two litho blade holders had to be expensive so they dropped them. Nickerson said the first "commercial shipment" he had any records of was Jan 1904. Why would he say "commercial" why not just "the first shipment". I think they had to sell some mail order and possible pre-orders in 1903 and would agree those sales may not have shipped until January 1904 but the revenue was 1903. Back then people waited on everything. However figuring out 1903 pre orders of who gets 20 blades and who gets 12 blades makes me lean toward 1903 shipped tin sets and the trial sets in the white pasteboard boxes.

So They scrapped the tins starting fresh in January dumped the old packaging as they had sales really picking up, not to mention we still have the whole patent issue that stamped on the tins and blade wrappers that could have been another can of worms for them. They go to the leather boxes and workers used the left over tins. In the hunt for my tin I talked with two collectors one told me the story of the 25 pulled out of the factory. 2 months later I asked a very well known collector where he got his tin and he said "I got one of the 25 pulled out of the factory years ago." two verbal sources. If 25 were left in the shop from 1903 there were probably a handful more workers may have taken. I say they pulled the remaining tins and went to the new packaging as they saw orders coming in heavy in late 1903.

Thier 1st ad was October 1903 in system magazine, so maybe yes.