What's new

Yet another "Future of Shaving" thread...

The future of shaving…

There have been a myriad of posts lately pontificating on where razor design is going, after some thought (OK – not much really, but bear with me) I have an idea about where the cartridge companies could go.

Here’s a free idea for someone at P&G or EverReady. I’ll bet they keep an eye on these boards, because of the growth rate of traditional wet shaving. This site alone has over 15,000 members and 1,000,000 posts. How could they not notice? Most of the posts are dealing with some aspect of wet shaving. I suspect there are even more lurkers that never post, just take the information and go. So with P & G starting to try to push traditional DE markets to cartridges, and with our rather small rebellion against cartridges here in the states, they have got to be scratching their heads for the next “big thing” in shaving. Well, I have it, and will post it here, let me know what you think.

Let’s face it, cartridges are not going away, they generate too much profit for P&G and EverReady. What could they possibly do to rejuvenate sales? More blades? I don’t think even the least discriminating consumer would fall for that. (Well they would, but hopefully not more than once! :lol:)

Here’s my idea: A proprietary handle much like the Mach3 or Fusion, but with an assortment of cartridges to choose from. From one blade up to five, let the consumer further customize their shave to their needs. They could even go one step further, and have different levels of aggressiveness for each style of cartridge.

What do you think? Am I just tilting at windmills? (where’d that phrase come from anyway?)
 
Am I just tilting at windmills? (where’d that phrase come from anyway?)

Don Quixote

What do you think?

Sounds interesting. I don't know where they can go from here. Your method implies they're making an admission they don't have any where else to go, and that the marketing each time they release a new model stating "one more blade = better" has been a lie all along.

The "add another blade" method has kinda reached the absurd extreme, which is why they started putting batteries in the handle (also, P&G owns Duracell).
 
They could even go one step further, and have different levels of aggressiveness for each style of cartridge.

I think this is the most logical move. They will give each level of aggressiveness a cute name/color and provide a bit of custimization to the cartridge experience.
 
Here’s a free idea for someone at P&G or EverReady. I’ll bet they keep an eye on these boards, because of the growth rate of traditional wet shaving. This site alone has over 15,000 members and 1,000,000 posts. How could they not notice?

15000 people (most inactive) approximately equals 0.000002 (that is, 0.0002%) of the world's population, not all of whom shave. Let's not flatter ourselves too much.

What do you think? Am I just tilting at windmills? (where’d that phrase come from anyway?)

I can see this moving forward within P&G or Schick -- smaller heads (think Sensor) for "ultimate maneuverability", M3 heads for "best balance and closeness" with Fusion heads for "maximum smoothness and comfort", blah blah blah. They could even sell a DE head for "retro cool", but they won't.
 
I don't know if I'm ready to believe that Gillette will never offer a single blade again. Sales of single blade Bic disposables are through the roof, and were substantial before the recession. People buy them in quantity, bags at a time.

If Gillette was ever smart enough to offer some sort of customizable handle with a variety of blades to choose from, the single edge would likely be a choice, IMHO.

The reason Gillette may not offer such a handle? Because no matter how many marketing tests they conduct that show we "demand more blades", they know damn well that given the choice, sales on anything over three blades would plummet, and that's just regular folks, not hardcore shavers like we are.

There was a time when we DE folks could be dismissed as niche or cottage or sub-culture, but talk of quality shaving is spreading all over the net. Not everyone who reads about brushes, soaps, creams and Merkurs is gonna jump on board, for every ten people who don't bother, one person tries it and likes it.
Given a few more years, I think you may see the DE/SE community become a consideration in the market.

We're not there yet, but badger&blade isn't the entire community by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
They can't ever go backward in the number of blades. That would be an admission that the more blades = better shave marketing is nothing but bs. They certainly wouldn't offer a mixture of razors with differing numbers of blades as a marketing scheme. P&G is already trying to convince folks that the Fusion is superior to the Mach3. I honestly believe that they are up against a wall with cartridge razor technology and I for one can't wait to see what gimmick they try to trot out next.
 
For gillette to introduce a new razor with fewer blades, they would have a problem on their hands. You see all of their marketing has focused on the blades and the spacing within the cartridge. Much of the marketing basically says that the fusion is superior to the mach 3 in every way. If gillette where to make and heavily market any razor with less than 5 blades, they'd have to admit the downsides to what has basically been their entire marketing strategy.
 
Gillette marketing is just a bunch of bull anyway, so I don't think that fewer blades would be an admission of failure. They would probably just say the metal is superior so less blades is okay. In the future though Schick may introduce a cartridge with one blade for every whisker on your face.
 
There was a time when we DE folks could be dismissed as niche or cottage or sub-culture, but talk of quality shaving is spreading all over the net. Not everyone who reads about brushes, soaps, creams and Merkurs is gonna jump on board, for every ten people who don't bother, one person tries it and likes it.
Given a few more years, I think you may see the DE/SE community become a consideration in the market.

P&G's shaving sales showed a profit of USD$1.67 billion in 2008. They sold USD$8.25 billion of products worldwide, up almost 11% from 2007. True, they'll take a hit because of the economy. If one person in ten who read about DE shaving converted to DE shaving, we'd hear about it, because that would mean millions of people DE shaving in the US alone. Let's say that 1 million people wet shave in the USA. The remaining 200 million or so people who shave buy their products from Schick or Gillette. That brings us up to 0.5% of the US market. Now, I wouldn't mind having 0.5% of --what, maybe $3 billion or $4 billion?--from that market, but even then that means that 99.5% of people shaving don't care about how we shave.

Pretty much everyone doesn't research their personal grooming (or do the math associated with its cost) -- they buy what's advertised at Target or Wal-Mart, or what they read about in People. I don't mean to drag everyone's mood down, but I don't think we're going to be anything but a niche market for a long time.

I enjoy my DE shaves; it's monumentally better than my experiences with Gillette and Schick, and cheaper (barring any more RAD) to boot. I hope the number of people who DE shave continues to grow, but I don't think we're even going to hold our own against the number of people in developing countries who are dumping DEs for (artificially?) cheap cartridges.

Enjoy shaving; proselytize shaving; support good shaving vendors and be a good customer to those vendors; but let's be clear-eyed about our place in the market.
 
They can't ever go backward in the number of blades. That would be an admission that the more blades = better shave marketing is nothing but bs. They certainly wouldn't offer a mixture of razors with differing numbers of blades as a marketing scheme. P&G is already trying to convince folks that the Fusion is superior to the Mach3. I honestly believe that they are up against a wall with cartridge razor technology and I for one can't wait to see what gimmick they try to trot out next.
I have to agree. I started with a DE around 1970 and, aside from a brief sojurn with a Wilkinson Bonded single-blade cartridge (which was a wonderful razor), have not found that any of the multi-bladed cartridges have given me a better shave than a DE. There are decades of marketing promoting multi-blade cartridges. I cannot imagine the depth of corporate embarrassment that would result from introducing cartridges with lesser blade counts much less a single-blade cartridge.

Additionally, we, as a society, have become much more tolerant of expecting an acquisition to be a disposable item. When was the last time you bought a pen and expected it to last more than a year or two at most? When was the last time you bought a leather-bound book? To manufacture a handle which could accept multiple cartridges would, in my opinion, reduce the "coolness" factor the manufacturers have tried to create with each new handle (i.e. "Gamer" handle for a Fusion).
 
Whose to say an admission of failure isn't marketable? Why not squeeze the money they can out of the five-bladed Fusion and when sales start to dwindle, jump on this idea. I'm not saying it will happen, but it's possible. I mean, people have already been making jokes about the number of blades for a while. Is it that inconceivable they market an assortment to customize one's shave? Admitting the Fusion wasn't the best razor after they want to move beyond it isn't that damaging. It's sort of similar to trashing the Mach 3 in favour of the Fusion, which they've been doing in their own commercials. Besides, knowing Gillette, I'm sure they could make a double bladed cartridge that, for some reason, needs to be priced at a few bucks a blade...
 
P&G's shaving sales showed a profit of USD$1.67 billion in 2008. They sold USD$8.25 billion of products worldwide, up almost 11% from 2007. True, they'll take a hit because of the economy. If one person in ten who read about DE shaving converted to DE shaving, we'd hear about it, because that would mean millions of people DE shaving in the US alone. Let's say that 1 million people wet shave in the USA. The remaining 200 million or so people who shave buy their products from Schick or Gillette. That brings us up to 0.5% of the US market. Now, I wouldn't mind having 0.5% of --what, maybe $3 billion or $4 billion?--from that market, but even then that means that 99.5% of people shaving don't care about how we shave.

Pretty much everyone doesn't research their personal grooming (or do the math associated with its cost) -- they buy what's advertised at Target or Wal-Mart, or what they read about in People. I don't mean to drag everyone's mood down, but I don't think we're going to be anything but a niche market for a long time.

I enjoy my DE shaves; it's monumentally better than my experiences with Gillette and Schick, and cheaper (barring any more RAD) to boot. I hope the number of people who DE shave continues to grow, but I don't think we're even going to hold our own against the number of people in developing countries who are dumping DEs for (artificially?) cheap cartridges.

Enjoy shaving; proselytize shaving; support good shaving vendors and be a good customer to those vendors; but let's be clear-eyed about our place in the market.

Obviously, we have to start killing those who refuse to convert. If that bothers you, don't worry. It wouldn't mean killing as many as you think. Once people see others getting capped, they start becoming real compliant, much more open-minded.
 
Whose to say an admission of failure isn't marketable? Why not squeeze the money they can out of the five-bladed Fusion and when sales start to dwindle, jump on this idea. I'm not saying it will happen, but it's possible. I mean, people have already been making jokes about the number of blades for a while. Is it that inconceivable they market an assortment to customize one's shave? Admitting the Fusion wasn't the best razor after they want to move beyond it isn't that damaging. It's sort of similar to trashing the Mach 3 in favour of the Fusion, which they've been doing in their own commercials. Besides, knowing Gillette, I'm sure they could make a double bladed cartridge that, for some reason, needs to be priced at a few bucks a blade...

Marketing weasels are geniuses when it comes to directing the sheep mentality of the public. They can pull this off without blinking.
 
Obviously, we have to start killing those who refuse to convert. If that bothers you, don't worry. It wouldn't mean killing as many as you think. Once people see others getting capped, they start becoming real compliant, much more open-minded.

Wow, that's pretty Che Guevara of you!

Marketing weasels are geniuses when it comes to directing the sheep mentality of the public. They can pull this off without blinking.

say, Che, can we start with the marketroids who pimp this crap? If the marketing weasels see other marketing weasels getting capped... :lol:
 
Here is something scary. I just looked Che Guevara up in Wikipedia. He looked a lot like me. Especially when I was thinner younger.
 
Here’s my idea: A proprietary handle much like the Mach3 or Fusion, but with an assortment of cartridges to choose from. From one blade up to five, let the consumer further customize their shave to their needs. They could even go one step further, and have different levels of aggressiveness for each style of cartridge.
I don't think that's a bad idea at all, as long as the handle is of good quality. Frankly, I'd buy something like this.

I've been thinking about a razor with a pivot head that takes injector blades or even half DE blades. The head attachment mechanism would be similar to the Merkur Futur but as flat as possible. The overall finish would also be similar to the Futur. I wonder if something like this could be made.
 
The future of shaving…

Here’s my idea: A proprietary handle much like the Mach3 or Fusion, but with an assortment of cartridges to choose from. From one blade up to five, let the consumer further customize their shave to their needs. They could even go one step further, and have different levels of aggressiveness for each style of cartridge.

What do you think? Am I just tilting at windmills? (where’d that phrase come from anyway?)

So instead of buying one style of ridiculously priced cartridges, you will now buy four or five styles of ridiculously priced cartridges?
 
So instead of buying one style of ridiculously priced cartridges, you will now buy four or five styles of ridiculously priced cartridges?

Not me, necessarily, but it would give the public more choice in their weapon of choice. (I like my Injector and Slant too much!)

I doubt they would give a price break based on the amount of blades anyway.
 
Top Bottom