115 replies to this topic

[Chris Miller]

This is a simple question, but some suppliers and multi-line reps want to pretend this is NOT important to distributors.

So tell us, would you rather supplier product be branded with YOUR info so that you get the reorders, or with the SUPPLIER's info so that the customer can take the reorder to any distributor they want?

Let us know how you feel!

[Schlep]

Chris Miller said:

This is a simple question, but some suppliers and multi-line reps want to pretend this is NOT important to distributors.

So tell us, would you rather supplier product be branded with YOUR info so that you get the reorders, or with the SUPPLIER's info so that the customer can take the reorder to any distributor they want?

Let us know how you feel!

It is interesting that this topic is all over the board and other than 2 suppliers none of the suppliers seem to be posting their feelings especially I would like to hear from the companies that market in this manner.

[Northern]

OK, I'll take a stab at this. (my first post here after reading for over a year)

I'm Pat and our company is Northern Light Recognition in Wisconsin. We're a smaller, family owned company that we opened in late '05 after more than 20 years of managing similar companies... but I digress.

I'm a bit surprised at the questions I'm seeing on the board. I just answered Daniele's question about whether there are suppliers that still protect the distributors pricing and now I find this. There seems to be a lot of distributors with quite a low level of trust in suppliers, a trend that we hope to do our part to reverse.

Our direction is to treat our distributors as if they were our own salespeople from the standpoint that they will never, ever have to worry about their customers doing an end around. We simply will not knowingly sell to an end user, period. We feel that our distributors are the face of our company in the field and we work hard to help them in their jobs.

To address the issue posed here, our practice is to use the distributors identity on all packing lists, shipping labels, etc. and we do not brand our products with our name in any way whatsoever. We feel the end user is the distributors customer. The distributor is our customer and the one we must earn the respect and ultimately, the loyalty of.

Pat Hamilton
Northern Light Recognition
Sage 68259

[Chris Miller]

Schlep said:

It is interesting that this topic is all over the board and other than 2 suppliers none of the suppliers seem to be posting their feelings especially I would like to hear from the companies that market in this manner.

Arnold,

It's amazing that hundreds of suppliers login to DT every week, and many are looking specifically at the selling direct, and branding type threads but very few reply. It's also funny that many of these same suppliers are searching for their company names to see what's being said.

This is all public info... just watch the homepage at the bottom, and Who's online. Suppliers are all the RED guys :D

Attached File(s)

•  Picture 236.jpg (364.72K)
  Number of downloads: 61

[MRI Suzanne]

I like the items they give to ME to have their info in some way on it. I don't give them away if there is too much info on them, and I try not to even show them. But it helps me, personally, to have their samples in house to look at and feel and judge. If they put them in a plastic bag with their information on the bag, it would be helpful - then I would have it so if I want to order their product - but I could take it out of the bag for the customer to see.
For self-promos or spec samples, I definitely do not want their information on them in any way shape or form.
I don't want ANY of their information on the boxes, packing slips, or anything else.
And, they had better not be selling retail to my customers.

[EagleMountain]

Shouldn't there be one more choice, i.e. NO info? Seems to me what's most important is the customer info anyway.

[Schlep]

Do we know if it is suppliers who are answering?

[Chris Miller]

Schlep said:

Do we know if it is suppliers who are answering?

I made it public. You can see who the jokers are by clicking on the numbers in the poll above.

[EagleMountain]

Chris Miller said:

I made it public. You can see who the jokers are by clicking on the numbers in the poll above.

Think you might explain that characterization a bit?

[Chris Miller]

EagleMountain said:

Think you might explain that characterization a bit?

Was I wrong to assume that anyone who choose that option must be joking?

"I don't really care either way. Branding my business as my business is not important to me."

Do you mean you're NOT joking? :eek:

[FindingPromo]

When someone get's involved in manufacturing then the idea and costing of Mold Charges is very clear. I'm in full agreement that in a dream world where buyers and distributors were willing to pay more for products, that all of these tooling charges could be taken care of.

If all boxes were blank, then there would be even more charges built in the products somewhere (unless you charge the individuals for those additional blank boxes, .vs the master cartons coming in from Asia). If the market is ready to pay for these extra charges, I'm all for it.

In regards to the actual products, somewhere, somehow, some type of traceable code, account, line name or supplier name will need to be on products for CPSIA compliance soon.

If those suppliers that are attempting to gain market share with Suppliers that have been given this "hall pass" to brand are unable to brand like the others ones do, why should that be?

[djoctagone]

So why did I vote the way that I did? (When this poll only had three options, I chose "I don't really care either way. Branding my business as my business is not important to me.")

Truthfully, it'd be great to have product branded with my brand.

But in an industry where any supplier could have tens of thousands of distributor customers, it'd be hard to ignore how easily Indoff's order could be branded with PromoPunch's info.

Even on a smaller scale, my order could be mistakenly branded with Pam O'Rourke's information (fellow Indoff Partner and great friend) and not mine.

And to imagine another scenario, there's a DT member that owns Identity Promotions--a Wisconsin PPD. I used to work for Identity Promotions--a Minnesota PPD with the same name.

I'd rather play things safely. Supplier branding, or no branding.

Now that Chris has modified this poll, I've changed my answer to "I would prefer no branding at all. Not mine, or the suppliers."

[Chris Miller]

FindingPromo said:

I'm in full agreement that in a dream world where buyers and distributors were willing to pay more for products, that all of these tooling charges could be taken care of.

Mark,

You've said this quite a bit, so I thought I would clear something up. Many decent sized suppliers have the functionality built right into the end of their shipping line to inkjet right onto boxes automatically. The extra "cost" is not even worth mentioning.

[EagleMountain]

Chris Miller said:

Was I wrong to assume that anyone who choose that option must be joking?

"I don't really care either way. Branding my business as my business is not important to me."

Do you mean you're NOT joking? :eek:

My post indicated the need for one more option. The other two, offered on their own, without any other options, were both unrealistic as one is dumb, the other may require additional costs. Best to ship blind. Period. Perhaps the incomplete poll itself was a joke rather than an oversight. Guess I misunderstood.

[Chris Miller]

EagleMountain said:

My post indicated the need for one more option. The other two, offered on their own, without any other options, were both unrealistic as one is dumb, the other may require additional costs. Best to ship blind. Period. Perhaps the incomplete poll itself was a joke rather than an oversight. Guess I misunderstood.

Im not trying to start an endless argument, the poll was simply to ask which of the two options distirbutor's would prefer. I guess I never imagined that someone wouldn't want their branding on the product they sell. The suppliers sure don't think this way, and WE'RE supposed to be the ones who know marketing! :eek:

Im not sure why anyone would have a problem with extra costs for branding. I see you spent extra money to put your logo on your website. What about your business card? Those could be blank too....

[FindingPromo]

Chris Miller said:

Mark,

. . .Many decent sized suppliers have the functionality built right into the end of their shipping line to inkjet right onto boxes automatically. The extra "cost" is not even worth mentioning.

I know that this does happen, and I also know one thing that needs to be cleared up. NOTHING is Free. . . .somebody pays for it.

Whenever you hear that someone is offering Free Freight, Free 24 hour service etc. etc. it's all in the perception. It means that in the case of freight somewhere it's built into the price of either those goods or another customer's goods. In the case of Free 24 hr. service, it means that they have invested in more inventory, and more trained staff and systems to have production lines available to handle this. Again, someone and some product cost being sold from that supplier is paying for this extra cost.

If a Supplier has the tooling all set up to print boxes 1 off for Distributors upon request, good for them, but again, this is built into the production cost of some of the product being sold (.vs other Suppliers re-using rec'd factory boxes from Asia). This ink jet and separate production / packaging shipping line has a cost, and if Distributors and end buyers are will to pay this extra cost from every Supplier of the products distributors and End buyers want - Good For Them! charge that extra cost, when the market will pay it. Landed Net cost, that what a distributor sometimes needs to look at when they are cost comparing supplier's products also, as they sometime do, before deciding on what they want to sell it for.

What you say is not worth mentioning, may not be an additional cost charged on the order, but again someone is paying for that operation, and it looks like every other customer of every other product may be subsidizing this choice.

[EagleMountain]

Chris Miller said:

Im not trying to start an endless argument,

Ok, you win.

[jimknecht]

djoctagone said:

But in an industry where any supplier could have tens of thousands of distributor customers, it'd be hard to ignore how easily Indoff's order could be branded with PromoPunch's info. Even on a smaller scale, my order could be mistakenly branded with Pam O'Rourke's information (fellow Indoff Partner and great friend) and not mine. And to imagine another scenario, there's a DT member that owns Identity Promotions--a Wisconsin PPD. I used to work for Identity Promotions--a Minnesota PPD with the same name.

I'd rather play things safely. Supplier branding, or no branding.

I agree 100%. So why isn't there an option in the pole for no branding?

Why is it my job to brand you, the distributor? I brand my company with you distributors, as I should. But why can't you brand yourself to your clients?

[Chris Miller]

jimknecht said:

Why is it my job to brand you, the distributor? I brand my company with you distributors, as I should. But why can't you brand yourself to your clients?

Oh we can, Jim - but that means shipping to us first and that adds more time and headaches.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's your responsibility. Sure would be a cool option though!

[Schlep]

Chris I think you should start the poll over as I for one do not need to have my branding on the label and boxes. I did not have that voting option.