posted 07-21-2002 11:41 PM ET (US)        

Later in college in Marketing 101, I found out what happened to my old favorite- Schlitz. It turned out some genius at Schlitz tried to take the number one rated beer and make it better. Schlitz Beer became a text book example of how not to screw-up a good thing.

Just to prove this, Coca-Cola went out and said it was going to change the formula of the number one soft drink in the world, Coca Cola. Why? Since you are already number one, what better mouse trap do you think your customers wanted? When all the dust settled, Coke execs said no worries, we will keep the old Coke and call it Classic. (The debate still continues, was Coke so ignorant as to become another Schlitz? Or did they just scare up the publicity?)

Harley Davidson did not change, suffered a little for it, but in the end the classic purists did not let it die. And look at what an American Icon this brand has become.

I saw the Montauk this weekend, and I had Marketing 101 Deja Vu. I can't help but think that we have Boston Whaler-Brunswick going the route of Schlitz Beer. No more classics in the line-up.

Losing the mainstay to go maintstream is just bad business. Good luck to Brunswick- a brand is worth nothing if there is no loyal following. Brunswick would be wise to remember "who brung Whaler to the Dance". Without a classic line-up to feed the purists and maintain the brand, Whaler will soon be ,shall we say, washed-up.

posted 07-22-2002 12:04 AM ET (US)            

It's bad enough that they "improved" the classics into mediocrity.

My even bigger gripe is that you can't have one unless it is Mercury powered.

I don't have a particular gripe with Merc Engines, but I wouldn't buy a boat that I couldn't power with MY choice of engines.

posted 07-22-2002 12:48 AM ET (US)            

Get over it, or go to the commercial division.

Jeeeezzz...

posted 07-22-2002 04:49 AM ET (US)            

Coke and Schlitz are inherently expendable products. You drink your can or bottle or glass and it's gone. If you want to keep enjoying your favorite beer or soft drink you've got to go out and buy some more. Thus virtually every customer is a repeat customer. The fraction of Coke sales to first time drinkers is going to be astonishingly small. Since the foundation of their business is repeat sales, giving these returning customers exactly what they expect is extremely important (as should have been obvious to executives at both these companies.

Boats, on the other hand, are inherently durable products. There isn't a whole lot of turnover and new customers have to make up a large percentage of BW's business. Getting new customers in the door is quite different from satisfying a returning customer. Consistency with previous products is much less important (I'm not saying it's not a factor, just that it's less important). In some respects, this is probably even more true for Whaler than other boat brands because they are so durable. A well treated Whaler can quite easily last the owner's lifetime. Because Whalers' seem to produce so many satisfied owners, there probably is a market for repeat buyers looking to move up to a larger model, but this means they are already looking for something at least a little different from their last purchase (not that some consistency isn't important, if the product has totally changed there is much less motivation to go back). This is a far different situation from the guy thinking that this can of Coke doesn't taste exactly the same as his last one.

All that aside, I don't think the Model T analogy is all that appropriate either. The Model T was dropped because by that time it was totally outclassed by it's competitors on a technical level and it couldn't even really compete on price. The Whaler hull designs may have gone back quite a few years, but I hardly think they can be called anything near totally outclassed. Indeed, I think a case can be made that every discontinued classic whaler hull design was superior to it's replacement in at least some aspects. The decision to replace the classic models (both the replacement of the larger hulls back in the early '90s and the recent replacement of the 13 and 17 hulls) was driven more by marketing than technical concerns. As such I would cite the continued availability of the classic designs through BW Commercial and Government Products, where technical concerns generally trump slick marketing.

Of all the example cited, I think that Harley Davidson is probably the closest, but again the extraordinary durability of Boston Whalers detracts from the comparison. Motorcycles have a lot of moving parts that eventually wear out and replacing them generally becomes more troublesome and expensive than buying a new bike. Thus there is a pretty constant turnover of Harleys and every Harley owner is likely a future Harley Davidson customer. Whalers are just built to last too long. The hulls are exceedingly durable and the parts that wear out (basically the engines and associated control systems) are relatively easy to replace. Unless they want a larger model, a whaler owner is pretty much set for life.

posted 07-22-2002 12:55 PM ET (US)            

sure, they've expanded their demographic in an incredibly successful manner (who doesnt want wealthy customers for a luxury product?). sure, they've expanded their product line to include apparel and miscellaneous goo-gaws in an incredibly successful way (who doesnt want high profit margin accessories to increase brand exposure?).

posted 07-22-2002 01:30 PM ET (US)            

I remember the Schlitz debacle. I was working for a Schlitz distributor when the impact of the recipe change hit our market. The decision was based on the belief that the consumer did not purchase by taste but by image. Schlitz started using molasses instead of sugar in their recipe. This sent the customer rushing to other brands (Coors was already #1 in California with a 60% market share)and not back to Schlitz.

posted 07-22-2002 10:50 PM ET (US)            

The next time you are in a Walmart, take notice of how busy the store is. It isn't busy because people are shopping there for quality. It is busy because the majority of the people are shopping for the cheapest price regardless of quality.

We buy foreign cars and products because they are cheaper. Sure I like my 1977 Ford pickup and of course, Ford doesn't build them as tough as that old truck anymore. Ford didn't stop building the trucks that way because they wanted to. They stopped because the buying public was rushing out to buy cheaper Toyota's and Datsun's that were built by guys who were earning 10 bucks a month in Japan. It didn't matter that those imports were rusting away in 8 years. Ford had to counter that threat by compromising quality and/or content of their product. the only other place they could cut a corner was in wages and we all know that couldn't happen.

This is the whole reason that there is a trade deficit. We have noone to blame but ourselves.

I love my 1969 Whaler but whenever I tell someone I own a Whaler, they translate that into a pricey boat. Sure they are pricey. You get what you pay for. But, the majority of the boat buying public isn't willing to part with that kind of money for a boat regardless of the quality. So, they buy a cheaper brand.

Whaler/Brunswick isn't stupid. They are not going to target their products for the thousands of people out there who want quality regardless of price. Whaler wants market share and to get that, they need to target their products for the millions of people out there who are chasing price instead of quality.

If the majority of the boat buying public wanted a boat that was unsinkable and would last forever, the manufacturers would have no choice but to build such a boat. The sad reality of the matter is that most people want to get out on the water for as cheap as possible. And, I am willing to bet that, as with cars, the majority of buyers don't keep a boat for more than 5 years. I have had my boat for 21 years but I don't know anyone else who has kept a boat more than a few years. So, why would any boat manufacturer build a boat designed to last more than 10 years?

Notice that my point here is that it is the majority who decides what the manufacturers build. I hate to spend my hard earned dollars on anything that isn't engineered to last indefinitely but I have come to the realization that as time goes on the manufacturers who build such products must either change or be driven out of business. My only choice is to continue to spend the extra money until I have no choice but to buy cheaper quality.

John Ruskin said it.

"Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of intelligent effort."- John Ruskin

"There is hardly anything in the world that some man can't make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey." - John Ruskin

posted 07-22-2002 10:53 PM ET (US)            

One car company that has beat the odds and continued to make a classic is Morgan Motors. I have a 1962 Plus 4. It's basically the same car as a 2002 Plus 4.
http://www.morgan-motor.co.uk

I believe Cessna hasn't changed the design of their current single engine airplanes because of the high costs to design and certify a new model. Morgan can continue to produce "new" classics because their cars are always in high demand. The current waiting time is down to 18 months. (They did however introduce a totally new model.)

That being said, Cessna no longer makes all of their old models, like the radial engined 195, and Morgan no longer makes three wheelers with their front mounted two cylinder JAP engines (JAP was a manufacturer). What defines a classic, your favorite model, the one you already own? I own a 1989 Montauk. Maybe its a classic. I know it's a fantastic boat.

Regarding the light bulbs that don't need replacement, one option is the induction lamp. Some versions will operate for 60,000 hours. GE makes a model called the Genura that burns for 15,000 hours. Even compact fluorescents last a long time compared to incandescents.

posted 07-22-2002 11:46 PM ET (US)            

I think Whaler has gone the right and inevitable direction targeting the people who are buying new boats. Obviously the new buyers don't want the boats that some us do so where would Whaler end up if they didn't change to the desires of the buying public.
If the, now classic Montauk was selling in numbers to be profitable I doubt that they would have changed.
I am using the Montauk as an example. It is a mans boat most wives hate the ride. Wives now have a major influance in boat purchases as well as the tremendous number of female buyers.
Don't cry because you can't buy a new classic, you probably wouldn't anyway. Don't pick on Whaler for design changes to keep the doors open and the name alive. If I were Brunswick would I ship the boats out without power so anything could be mounted, Yeah sure I would when I got around to it.

I thing it's about time to quit bashing Whaler for their decisions. The owners of the new hulls seem happy and that is what counts, it will sell boats.

posted 07-23-2002 12:27 AM ET (US)            

I MUST adress whalerron here too. You mentioned people buying foreign cars because they are cheap etc. and them rusting to the ground, but I disagree completely. I am a flag-waving, born and bred proud American, a six year Marine and a son of a Pittsburgh Steelworker. But when I was in a bind and I needed a truck to get me and my cammie greens back and forth 30 miles to work rather than living in the barracks, I turned to Toyota. For 8 years I never turned a wrench on that truck aside from changing the oil. I took that truck From SLC Utah to the inners of Baja California. I beat it most everyday and it spent the majority of its time with me within a few miles of the ocean (granted we dont have a ton of humidity here.) I bought the truck for 7,100 brand new in 94 and sold it for the steal of 3,000 just a couple of weeks ago and it ran and looked pretty darned close to the way it did the day I bought it.
( Oh and yes I now have a Ford, but for the rust comment on imports, I had a 1978 Ford Ranger with a 460 and a trailer package that would pull down a house, but it rusted out in 5 years, that was in Pittsburgh). The Toyota was in no way a cheaply built truck but the price was sure cheap!

Now for my stand on the marketing on Boston Whalers part......
Boston Whaler is a business that knows the ropes. Personally I would think they played it out very well, although they have always been known to be a bit pricey, they got very pricey when the economy got very strong. Now I am not saying this was their strategy but if I were CEO, I would have said something to the effect of push the price as high as we can get it in the thriving economy (the old days of the dot com boom where everyone seemed to be making a ton). Then when the bubble bursts (which we all knew it would someday) give it a bit and drop the prices on models (such as the new montauk). This way we make max money off the thriving economy, then in economic downturn, we not only keep our loyal customers but we then begin to draw in the bystanders that used to think we were too expensive and now seem to see things almost as a must buy, as the boats that the bystanders used to dream of having are suddenly within their priceranges. Dont call it gouging the strong economy, call it helping out the weak economy and streamlining production. That is how I look at it, if I were the CEO.

This is all just my 1.50 worth. A Whaler is still a Whaler. I still see the when we're making tuna runs and I am sure I will see them for years to come, both classic and post classic. I am with Tsuriki here, get over it.

posted 07-23-2002 04:39 AM ET (US)            

I think we should change the Forum title 'Post Classic' into 'New Classic'!!

posted 07-23-2002 08:49 AM ET (US)            

Every month or so, a thread like this comes up. The berating of BW for turning their back on classic owners; the lack of a "classic" in the line up; Merc only power; how the designs are not what they used to be, etc.

BW makes no money off the used market. When was the last time the vast majority of US (see I am including myself in this) went to a BW dealer and opened our checkbook for a NEW boat? When have many of us gone to a BW dealer with money in hand HONESTLY ready to buy (not just tire kicking and wasting salespeople's time) and told the dealer that based on current designs, we would rather have a Mako, Intrepid, Jupiter, et. al. because we don't like the current model iteration, and actually went and bought one of these other brands.

What about ordering a CPD hull? How many of us have shown our support for the "classic" designs buy getting one of these instead of a "new" model (again talking new).

The fact is, that BW makes a high quality boat that sells. They are not Enron or Worldcom and soon to file bankruptcy. They are not experiencing a highly eroded market share. I think that we would be hard pressed to show that used "classic" sales are canabalizing new sales because people don't like the new designs and feel that BW has abandoned their customer.

What about the cost of new some may say. They are so expensive, I couldn't get one if I wanted to. Well, so is that truck in your driveway, your house, the tools for your workshop. Prices go up; whether it is based on higher costs, inflation, etc prices go up. based on your income 20 years ago, could most of us had affored a new Whaler then?

The bottom line is that there a lot of grousing about how BW has completely neglected their "core" customer. Well if the majority of us that buy used boats are the core customer, BW would be out of business, and we would just keep selling used boats between us.

Flame on...

Brian Blazer JR.

posted 07-23-2002 09:06 AM ET (US)            

I don't think that there is a company out there that will not try to reduce the cost of there product for the sake of increasing profit margin, but I would imagine that they would not do it while sacraficing the quality that their brand has been built on for decades.

So the new hulls look different. They are still using the same technology that we love the classics for, but the lines and features are updated. I think it has to happen for Whaler or any company to survive. Sure some like it and some don't, but I think it is a neccesary move to attract new customers and grow.

posted 07-23-2002 09:58 AM ET (US)            

I live in the Detroit area--cars are king here. We live just off of the famous Woodward Avenue, and in the summer we often go down to the Dairy Queen at Woodward and 14-Mile, the epicenter of the Woodward Crusin' strip, buy a small cone, and watch the cool cars pull in.

It is really amazing what you can see, all these "Dairy Queen Cars" as I call them, driven only in the summer and only for short cruises to the DQ.

Invariably, a old guy pulling in with a 1950s or 1960s classic will get way more attention than a yuppie who wheels in with a 2002 Lexus. The new car may be a marvel of machinery, but people like to gaze at 1967 Dodge RamChargers, etc. It is a way of reliving their youth.

That is a great deal of the fun of a Classic Whaler. It is a hoot to see 20-year old (or older) boats in pristine condition.

The fact that Whaler does not make these exact same hulls anymore is not of much concern. Anyone who really wants a particular older hull can find a used one--it is not that hard.

posted 07-23-2002 10:49 AM ET (US)            

When they do a complete desin change I then rate it to the competition. Does a new 170 hold a candle to an Edgewater or a McKee? Does the 230 compare to a regulater or SeaCraft? As far as them discontinuing the Montauk, that is their business, not mine. Personally I never understood why anyone would pay $25k for a Montauk when they could buy a used one, buff or spray some awlgrip and repower for 1/2-2/3's the price of new and not loose as much when sold.

posted 07-23-2002 11:40 AM ET (US)            

further on the issue of Quality and its diametrically opposed counterpart, Walmart; if you shop there, you have absolutely NO RIGHT to cry about the degradation of downtowns, the obscenity that is the suburbs, the loss of your local baitshop, etc...

I DO NOT shop for the cheapest price/product. it is one of my goals to use my purchasing power in an attempt to further Quality of Life issues for me and mine. this often entails multiple stops, increased financial cost (not simply costs, because they cover much more than money) and an attempt to patronize knowledgable, locally owned and operated businesses.

unfortunately, as evidenced by the change in the whaler line, my position is in the minority. people as a rule give not even a marginal damn about Quality of Life issues other than paying them lip service.

this design change falls under the heading of "homogenization" and is a component of the dumbing down of society or playing to the lowest common denominator.

posted 07-23-2002 01:33 PM ET (US)            

The front shift rocker fell off at 800 miles and the rear one fell off at 8,500 miles. Harley of Palm Beach said "this is normal, happens all the time". Harley of Palm Beach also said "no, this is not covered under your $ 700.00 4 year extended warranty".

The air-cooled cylinder heads are hot enough to burn your legs no matter how thick your "Harley" brand jeans are. I guess you don't run into this problem if all you do is ride from bar to bar.

My "soon to be" classic, Pearl Flash Yellow, Honda GL1800, will run circles around the Harley in any area or category. It even gets more looks and questions from passers by.

My points ... Change is not always bad. Classic features are not always good.

I bought the Newtauk 170 (don't want to offend anyone with the name) as my last boat. I intend to keep it for at least 40 years if I am around that long. Comparing it to other boats at the boat show, it seems to still be far better than anything else out there.

Will let you know what falls off ...

posted 07-23-2002 01:58 PM ET (US)            

Do you know that 95% of all Harleys are still on the road.....The other 5% actually made it back to the garage:)

posted 07-23-2002 03:44 PM ET (US)            

As far as the "classic" Whalers are concerned, I think it is a great idea that Whaler has chosen to sweeten my investment. By "improving" the design, my '74, 21ft Outrage just became all that more desirable to future fans. Look at the attention paid to cherry '57 Nomads and the like.

posted 07-24-2002 08:37 AM ET (US)         

Levis? They are in dire financial straights, despite charging $35 for a pair of jeans.

Jeep? They almost went out of business, were saved by Chrysler, which was saved once by the US government and later by Daimler Benz.

Penn? They used to have the market cornered - no longer - witness the inroads made by Shimano, Ryobi (who makes Penn Prions), Tica, Accurate. . . .

IBM? I don't think they even make PC's anymore (except laptops). IBM has decided to focus its attention to maainframes and consulting and has left the PC market to Dell, Gateway and Apple, all of whom are struggling.

posted 07-24-2002 11:56 AM ET (US)            

And we are doing well in servers (both Intel and
our own PowerPC AIX machines).

posted 07-25-2002 11:27 PM ET (US)            

Jessie James rocks!!! Have you seen the specials on West Coast Choppers on The Discovery Channel?

posted 07-26-2002 03:22 AM ET (US)            

Whalerron, I sort of figured you meant the late 70 early 80 imports, I remember them well.
However regarding this statement....
But, the reason you were able to afford that 94 Toyota was because of the lack of pay and benefits that Toyota gives their employees. A lot of people want to blame the unions for the price of American cars but the other side of the coin is the slave conditions that the foreign manufacturers use to build their products.

Well you are correct, however I would word things differently. The reason I could ONLY afford the Toyota in 94 was the lack of pay that the government was giving me as an enlisted Marine (as any enlisted serviceman will protest, it just doesnt measure up). However since 94 Toyota has deemed that they will charge outrageous prices for their trucks. I went back to a Ford, my full size F150 was cheaper then a mini-toyota. I hpe it will last as long and if not, well, I am making a bit more money these days than I was in 1994 and if the Ford falls apart, at least I can say I was supporting the local economy.

I am just pretty jazzed that I finally got to order a BW hat and t-shirt.

posted 07-26-2002 09:56 AM ET (US)            

thunderbay, not sure what your questions are other than why are bikes priced so, and that i cannot answer with anything other than the obvious: demand.

i am more familiar with the corporate side of the bidnet and wherein their focus lies, rather than the production side. based upon my experience, Quality is and remains first and foremost in importance.

posted 07-26-2002 02:21 PM ET (US)            

Hope this eases you concern on longevity of the Ford F-150s.
My 77 F-150 standard bed with the 4.9L straight-6 now has 277,000 miles and still runs like a clock. Outside of regular service, the only thing done so far to the engine has been the replacement of the waterpump and a bad valve lifter. The danged thing still does not burn a drop of oil.