137 replies to this topic

[rosec]

Arnie,

I really didn't think a supplier would send something like this out for your end users. Has this guy been in the industry long? Was it a mistake? I just don't get it.......

Goalie shmolie give me one of those cigars!!!!:D

Good game what I saw of it....


R

[Schlep]

rosec said:

Arnie,

I really didn't think a supplier would send something like this out for your end users. Has this guy been in the industry long? Was it a mistake? I just don't get it.......

Goalie shmolie give me one of those cigars!!!!:D

Good game what I saw of it....


R

The one I had Rose was an email blast and you were able to click the client safe version but it was the same as the distributor version. I do not know if it is the fault of the company or the fault of the blaster.

[rosec]

It truely sounds like a mistake......give the guy a call.....he might not even know it has happened!

Now I'm talkin the best hockey ever!!!!
Men's USA vs CANADA
USA USA USA
I can do big/red for that!!!

Have a good weekend all!

Rose

[SunScarf]

Schlep said:

...there are suppliers on here who seem to disagree and that the end user is their customer and IMO it is just a matter of time before those suppliers take it one step further and go direct. That is the problem.

By this, you may be A S S-U-ME-ing some serious issues and "punishing" worthy suppliers. For those suppliers who have invested in their own brands, the intent is to maintain "customer" satisfaction - by customer, I mean those who are actually benefiting from their advertising investment - the end user (the ones branding their own identities on suppliers' products). True, branding (to a degree) creates "customer ownership" with those benefiting investors parting with their cash, but as a supplier of "imprinted products" that are designed to deliver brand loyalty in the recipient's mind, it appears (through other discussions also) that some distributors are asking ALL suppliers to be "merely a supplier" and sit in the shadow until called to light, and thus not benefit in-part by utilizing and interacting with the whole "advertising circle". Suppliers also have the right to protect themselves from negative implications that an end user may receive from a distributor.

Should a distributor not like a supplier, they have the right to choice by seeking a new supplier (so long as they can supply the same product(s)). Likewise, should an end user wish to invest in certain exclusive (branded) products, why should their decision to shop elsewhere be any different? (As an example, if WalMart decided to stop selling Coke & PEPSI and exclusively sold their generic store brand, I wouldn't necessarily purchase their generic brand. More than likely, I would go somewhere else to buy PEPSI or Coke, because I know that I am buying more than soda. In my mind, the after-costs (cognitive dissonance) may be more than saving a few pennies by purchasing the generic brand, when people at the office party ridicule me as a cheap bugger with no taste!)

It's been said many times over and over on DT, that end users are the distributor's customer, yet it is the suppliers' products/quality that deliver the ADVERTISING RESULTS as to why end users are spending. Customer satisfaction is delivered in part by both the distributor AND the supplier. This is why customer ownership cannot be viewed as some definitive vertical line, but more like a horizon. Suppliers own the delivery of satisfaction with their products. Therefore, are we not at least in part by definition owning the customer also??

All emotion aside, this is simple logic, not an attempt at undermining distributors and "stealing" their customers by selling direct. Any suppliers that sell direct, IMO, are not real suppliers and cannot be called or viewed as such.

Edited by SunScarf, 27 February 2010 - 11:12 PM.

[FindingPromo]

Great synopsis Peter.

As Oliver Wight along with his co-authors writes in his book Class A Leadership:

http://www.amazon.co...e/dp/0470260343

The Traditional Supply Chain "scope" of a Supplier traditionally was centered around it's production, with limited scope involving it's Suppliers (wherever they are stateside or offshore), and also with limited scope including it's Distribution Supply company.

In Extended Supply Chains, which are now being viewed in 21st century business preparing to compete and deliver in today's marketplace, this Extended "scope" that the Supplier is now considering . . they are very involved in their own upstream supply chain, their own Production, the activities of their Sales companies, how the customer is using and accepting their products, the customer who is purchasing from the distributor, the customer's customer who is receiving the product from the end buyer and ultimately the person who is "consuming" and/or as Peter states being the recipient / influences advertiser of the advertising product.

We can get all caught up on a simple definition of customer to read ONLY as the purchaser of the product by the PPD salesperson, but if a Supplier only looks at that transaction, they are not prepared to compete in the 21st century marketplace.

Just because a supplier has a very good understanding that what they do, what they produce and supply affects customers of all levels . . . . does not immediately equate to any of them choosing to circumvent the traditional "sales" transaction between a PPD and an end buyer.

It's good operations management to practice in 21st century manufacturing of a world class company.

Today's supplier, if it is only going to produce generic product that can simply be knocked off / produced by another supplier, and/or leaving them so exposed that any distributor on a whim, could simply buy from other people for whatever reason, then they are not suitably supporting their proprietary product development, nor are they looking out for their employees or their stakeholders/shareholders / owners of their company.

With no confirmation of the ultimate manufacturer of the product, whose quality and design that it actually is a part of the reason, that recipients of a business gift, and employee incentive, or an award for good work, then the product loses it's advertising value to the end "consumer" of the product.

This discussion of how some suppliers "MAY" choose to sell direct, is a completely different discussion.

If Suppliers in our industry choose to think that today's marketplace is the same old marketplace that simply sold generic product 30 or 50 years ago, and where the quality and integrity of the Supplier does not shine through all the way to the recipient . . let them think that way, and they will go the way of those suppliers that simply get their lunch eaten, day to day by generic suppliers at lower prices and of less quality.

Edited by FindingPromo, 27 February 2010 - 11:03 PM.

[FindingPromo]

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. . . . . . .Arthur Schopenhauer


A quote a friend posted today, thought was relevant . . . .

[Chris Miller]

Mark,

Last year I spent $40,000 in marketing expense to get the customers we needed to make our numbers. Could you let me know which of your suppliers would be willing to share in that expense, since you feel the customer that I worked so hard to gain, belongs to both me, and the supplier?

Just let me know which suppliers share in our marketing expense in this way. I'm talking 50/50 like any decent "partnership" would be. Really, pray tell.

[FindingPromo]

Chris,

There is that word again Belong . . . it simply is not the right one here in this case.

Multiple customers are influenced downstream by multiple folks along the way, and just because an Asian factory thinks of and cares for the Supplier, Distributor, Buyer, User and Recipient all along the way, does not mean that any of them Belong to them. Earning reorders or even the first order needs to be a part of each and every part of the chain, and does not equate to, meaning to remove any particular part of the distribution channel from EARNING their part each time.

Your choice to spend $40K to show value to your buyers is your choice.

In 10 years, I've chosen to spend 40% of all of my income back into the marketplace via travel, marketing, spending quality time both learning more from my factories and with customers in meetings at their offices, and at tradeshows, via web and online communication tools, volunteering on my own time and travel to support the industry non-profit assns, etc. I'd like for anyone to show me any other parts to our industry that does that. My whole part of the industry landscape that companies like mine work in mostly is purely marketing and I never feel that any of my customers Belong to me. Each and every day, I know that some of my lines get shopped for similar products, but I know we work hard, and in some cases, are a part of a good reason that I have 7 5star lines, two 4.5 star and a couple others, mostly without enough reports turned in. Working with Suppliers that truly do Get It, is an ongoing goal of ours.

RE: you asking which companies will spend money to support your company, this is not the venue to state that, as 1) in most cases, Suppliers choose to invest 1 on1 with their Distributor partners that partner with them and most would not be stating in public specific unique things that they do for one out here, and 2) unless you reside in the Western States, I'm not specifically the one that should be delivering on your personal requests. Trust to say, those that show commitments and continued business have more supplier resources available to them.

I won't be specific to your request but say, that it's not the Suppliers' responsibility to split marketing costs that you choose to get your business or market share, but rest assured, Suppliers are spending PLENTY of money in Catalogs, Service Providers, page turning catalog services, Search engines, Regional and MLReps, Trade Shows, Branding in this and other channels, sponsorships, spec and random samples discounted (aka Free Freight that they pay for), "free" 24 hours service etc. etc. And in your case, maybe even paying for some DT advertising, in order support all of your business initiatives to Market and Brand your companies (not for sure, but some may set it as investing in your company). Some distributors will choose to use the available tools/investments that suppliers make available, and some will not, as many have many different ways they choose to earn value each and every day.

Marketing a company such as a distributorship is done in many ways in order to earn business. Some national firms advertising in trade publications in order to have performing sales reps join their firms. Some individuals invest more in on line advertising, self promos, gifts to customers, gifts to customers for referrals, branded boxes, their own branded labels in apparel, their own delivery trucks with their company name on it, etc. etc. Some go to trade shows and convince the suppliers and reps to be able to take dozens and dozens of samples so they can drop them off to customers to attempt to earn orders. Each can choose to market however they choose to. Some use the tools Suppliers make available to them, and some only use some of them, depending on how they go to market.

Edited by FindingPromo, 28 February 2010 - 01:00 PM.

[Stanley]

Chris and all other distributors,

The opinions of Mark are not from the mountain tops.

They are not validated because he quotes an out of context statement of how the strong over power those who can't do anything.

The Facts are these ...

Suppliers enjoy instant access to more than 80,000 distributor salespeople, who they don't have to pay to train or pay any expenses to run they're distributorship.

Suppliers entered into this industry decades ago agreeing to only market and brand to distributors.

Suppliers have enjoyed orders being brought to them by distributorships.

Distributors gave orders to suppliers because they knew that the suppliers would NOT go direct.

When distributors find suppliers selling direct, they STOP selling that supplier's products.

Suppliers get paid by distributors and that ends each PO contract.

Distributor get paid by their end user clients and that ends each contract.

Suppliers now, because business is tougher, simply want to go direct by branding the the end user.

This attitude that the suppliers somehow has rights to the distributor's client is BS and everyone knows it.

But the only way suppliers can make this claim is to violate the original agreement and to do WHAT EVER THEY WANT TO DO.

And what are distributors going to do about it?

Not to cross threads but get this right.

You'll always know what suppliers feel they have a ownership to a distributors clients whenever you see the supplier branding and marketing themselves to the distributor's client.

This action says to the distributor that we, the suppliers, will do and claim whoever we feel we can claim.

But don't forget that their are many suppliers who DON'T feel as Mark Shinn does.


Many suppliers DON'T feel that they own the distributor's clients.

So Attention All Distributors - Give your business to suppliers only after you find out their belief.

And learn to ask the right questions of your supplier before giving them a job.

Pay attention and you'll know<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[rosec]

Now there is an opinion i can agree with.

If you do not like what a Supplier is doing....stop buying from them. Enough people stop buying - they will get the idea. Hit 'em where it hurts - in the pocketbook.

Rose

[jimknecht]

Received an email blast this morning from ASI, with the title: Reach a Quarter Million Qualified End-Buyers Today.

So with all the enduser shows & now such marketing, it really makes me wonder about this discussion. Obviously, suppliers marketing to endusers is encouraged by many distributors & this marketing is totally different than a supplier selling to the client, but dang, sometimes I wonder where this industry is headed.

[Schlep]

jimknecht said:

Received an email blast this morning from ASI, with the title: Reach a Quarter Million Qualified End-Buyers Today.

So with all the enduser shows & now such marketing, it really makes me wonder about this discussion. Obviously, suppliers marketing to endusers is encouraged by many distributors & this marketing is totally different than a supplier selling to the client, but dang, sometimes I wonder where this industry is headed.

Jim can you post the flier please.

[Chris Miller]

jimknecht said:

Received an email blast this morning from ASI, with the title: Reach a Quarter Million Qualified End-Buyers Today.

Of course you did. Ok now I can admit it, if this is true then yes... I do HATE ASI like all of you have always said. ;)

[Schlep]

Chris Miller said:

Of course you did. Ok now I can admit it, if this is true then yes... I do HATE ASI like all of you have always said. ;)

Wow if I did not see it with my own eyes I would not believe it. The next question I have is where did they get the names?

The quick answer (question) is did they harvest the names from our ESP presentations that are saved?

I think we all need answers to this real fast and I think every member of ASI should be sending them an email or phone call.

[jimknecht]

I didn't post the blast, because I was having issues saving it where I could post it here. I sent the blast to Arnie, so he can post it.

ASI ain't making friends with some suppliers either, when they invite printing equipment manufacturers to exhibit at their shows. Making it easier for distributors to print their own product does nothing to help this industry.

And like I've said multiple times, there are MANY more distributors providing decoration that suppliers selling direct. So we all have our issues as to how this industry operates. This is just as important an issue to us a suppliers selling direct is to you.

[FindingPromo]

Stanley said:

Suppliers enjoy instant access to more than 80,000 distributor salespeople, who they don't have to pay to train or pay any expenses to run they're distributorship.

I'm trying to understand what the most recent post has to do with, and what point is the point of the post . . so I'll just tackle this one . .

Instant Access?

Does not a Supplier need to staff up a support system, build a web site, load up and pay for Service Providers that support the industry, design, develop and produce products as well as most the same for catalogs . . ????

Suppliers do not have to pay to train?

What about all of the above, in addition to invest in trade shows, train and send staff to present at trade shows, ship out sometimes free samples, fix over 50% of the purchase orders sent in by distributors and/or spend time contacting them for more information for over 50% of the PO's . . .

Please help us understand where this is instant access to distributor resellers, that may choose dozens if not hundreds of similar products from similar catagories that other suppliers provide?

[Stanley]

Mark, I guess you have never owned your own company?

Do you understand the general business model?

Every business owner has the opportunity to choose their method of distribution.

And this is in addition to any and all expenses incurred to produce and manufacture their product.

That's right Mark, there are actual costs that an owner knows they will have prior to engaging in a business.

Some Methods of distribution of product.

Direct Sales - Must hire a sales force, advertise and cultivate your own clients

Internet Sales - Must hire a sales force, advertise and cultivate your own clients

Sold through Franchises (Sears, McDonalds, Nordstroms) Must sell franchises, build a building, hire sales force, advertise and cultivate your own clients.

There might be more models but the one that suppliers in OUR industry chose is to sell through DISTRIBUTORS.

Meaning, they agreed and invited the distributor to sell their products with the understanding and knowledge that the SUPPLIER would NOT go direct.

And by direct, that meant, not branding direct and not selling direct.

The reward is having INSTANT ACCESS to more than 60,000 trained sales people who also run their own businesses with all it's expense.

But now suppliers want to change the rules.

If suppliers would stop taking a short cut to our clients and instead put the distributor out front, several things would happen.

Suppliers would create more LOYALTY with distributors.

Distributors would send more orders and reorders to the SAME suppliers.

And don't forget, whether any business opens it's doors, there are expense that are NOT recoverable.

Businesses just hope that if they have better mouse trap, people will buy it.


<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[jimknecht]

Stanley said:

M
There might be more models but the one that suppliers in OUR industry chose is to sell through DISTRIBUTORS.

Meaning, they agreed and invited the distributor to sell their products with the understanding and knowledge that the SUPPLIER would NOT go direct.

And by direct, that meant, not branding direct and not selling direct.


<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

Stanley, I agree the industry was founded on this basic concept.

Would you also agree, the reciprocal of this concept is that distributors would sell & not decorate? Would you agree there are MANY more distributors providing their own decoration (embroidery, contract printing, etc.) than suppliers that sell to endusers?

Point is, the boundaries that our founders set up have been moved. They have been blurred. IMO, it is wrong to pick on only one aspect of this problem. I guess what I'm saying is, clean up your own trash before complaining about our trash. It is a two way street.

[Stanley]

FindingPromo said:

I'm trying to understand what the most recent post has to do with, and what point is the point of the post . . so I'll just tackle this one . .

Instant Access?

And regarding your ever popular sarcasm...

I bet you think Direct TV has some right to come in to my home and watch tv in my living room because they paid for a satellite, employees, running fiber optics, maintaining trucks not to mention they invented and are constantly updating their product... RIGHT?

WRONG.

If a company's product goes out of date or becomes unpopular, that is also part of the business model.

It's called "Going out of business".

Now once again, business have the right to conduct business any way they want.

It's called Opportunity Cost.

But there are consequences as well.

If supplier lets distributors KNOW UP FRONT, that they want to sell direct and that the supplier thinks they own your distributor clients, then distributors can decide whether to do business with them or not.

But suppliers beware, distributors will speak their opinion with their DOLLARS.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[adam2208]

Stanley-
I have to ask this question- have you ever imported branded merchandise directly from overseas without utilizing an ASI/PPAI licensed supplier? We do, as many other mid-large distributorships do as well. Are we guilty of many of the same "crimes" you have placed on certain suppliers?