Origin of the complex blade slot?

[Nubo]

It strikes me that the "standard" DE blade slot is quite a complex shape. It suggests that quite a few different slot designs were accomodated by this "new" standard. Anybody have information on just how many different styles were merged?

 

[Bogeyman]

Double Edge Blades

www.shaveworld.org

 

[Nubo]

Perfect! Thanks!

 

[Rhody]

Very cool info thanks for posting

 

[Grundi]

Thanks, @Bogeyman, good read and some pertinent history. Also gives a new twist on the old adage...if you can't beat 'em, then join 'em. But in this case, it's...if you can't beat 'em, then buy 'em.

 

[FarmerTan]

Thanks, @Bogeyman, good read and some pertinent history. Also gives a new twist on the old adage...if you can't beat 'em, then join 'em. But in this case, it's...if you can't beat 'em, then buy 'em.

Lol, well said. And thank you @Bogeyman for the info. Something I wondered about, but had no idea how to find the answer!

 

[Grundi]

Lol, well said. And thank you @Bogeyman for the info. Something I wondered about, but had no idea how to find the answer!

The money quote from the article when asked why Gillette would pay $20M for a $9M company..."But, gentlemen, I have a patent on your product!"

 

[Slats6NYR]

If you can find it, there is a great book on the history of Gillette that is about 40 years old now. I got it through the NYPL. Can't remember the name of it. I read it a few years back. Goes through the whole Probak-Gillette story and the slot for the blades.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

 

[razorboi]

Double Edge Blades

www.shaveworld.org

Interesting story, but skips right over the industrial espionage part - which is that Gaisman gained inside information about Gillette's forthcoming patent application and beat Gillette to the patent office with a copy-cat design, thereby being able to claim (though fraudulently), that Gillette was infringing on Gaisman's design, when in reality, it was the other way round.
Unfortunately, Gillette had failed to adequately protect their trade secret prior to filing for patent protection, and would not be heard to complain in court that it had been stolen from them. Thus, it appeared they would be found liable and have to pay Gaisman untold damages for infringement, since their design had already been released and sold to the public, causing loss to Gaisman and continuing loss into the future.
Thus, a settlement agreement was reached.
It's true that the settlement amount far exceeded the value of Gaisman's company, but it was an amount chosen and demanded by Gaisman to give him control of Gillette.
It was a high-stakes gambit that paid off.
In reality, an audacious power-grab by Gaisman. He was paid in Gillette stock, sufficient to give him majority voting power within the company.
That's how he came to be chairman of Gillette after the settlement.
A mere buy-out would not have conferred that to him.
Essentially, he seized Gillette in what we would describe to-day as a hostile take-over.

 

[Rhody]

Interesting story, but skips right over the industrial espionage part - which is that Gaisman gained inside information about Gillette's forthcoming patent application and beat Gillette to the patent office with a copy-cat design, thereby being able to claim (though fraudulently), that Gillette was infringing on Gaisman's design, when in reality, it was the other way round.
Unfortunately, Gillette had failed to adequately protect their trade secret prior to filing for patent protection, and would not be heard to complain in court that it had been stolen from them. Thus, it appeared they would be found liable and have to pay Gaisman untold damages for infringement, since their design had already been released and sold to the public, causing loss to Gaisman and continuing loss into the future.
Thus, a settlement agreement was reached.
It's true that the settlement amount far exceeded the value of Gaisman's company, but it was an amount chosen and demanded by Gaisman to give him control of Gillette.
It was a high-stakes gambit that paid off.
In reality, an audacious power-grab by Gaisman. He was paid in Gillette stock, sufficient to give him majority voting power within the company.
That's how he came to be chairman of Gillette after the settlement.
A mere buy-out would not have conferred that to him.
Essentially, he seized Gillette in what we would describe to-day as a hostile take-over.

wow thats very interesting thx for posting