This weekend I was in western Massachusetts, in an outlet store, and I stumbled across a perfect example of an issue I’ve been thinking about since I started working with my father: the trade-off between price and quality.  It was a chair very similar to the one in this image.

Bergere version of our Rope Chair

It’s a knock-off variation of our Rope chair pictured here.

FPV Rope Chair, R139

Perhaps “knock-off” is the wrong word to use.  It is clearly a bergere form, whereas the back of ours is open.  Plus, the original chair was not our design anyway (I believe we are perhaps the only firm with patterns based on the 1870’s Napoleon III original, however) and “knock-offs” are a part of this business anyway.  What shocked me was the price.  The bergere was selling for about $2,000 in the store. 

 Suffice it to say, we could not carve, finish and upholster one of our chairs for even close to that cost!   

 Now, there are some important differences that must be pointed out.  Ours is a gilt finish.  Ours has tufted upholstery.  Ours has a stretcher.  Our carving has greater detail.  The proportions of our rope is consistent.  The tassels of our arm-posts are free-standing from the posts. And so on… 

R139 side detail of arm post, leg, and stretcher

But at some point you have to ask, does the client signing the check care?  Would they rather have the more expensive, detailed example of fine craftsmanship, or would they prefer the inexpensive example that gives a similar idea of the original?

I believe that more and more, clients are opting for the later. 

Certainly, the current recessionary times do not help, but it’s my opinion that the average client is more interested in the “idea” behind a piece and the look or feel of their home as a result.  You could call them the “aspirational” client.   The apsirational client may make the choice based on price, or simply because they are unware of the custom option, or the reasons behind the cost difference.   But, for whatever reason, they decide to spend their money based on how they want their home to feel.

Now, there is still a client out there that does want the detail and does want the craftsmanship, and is willing to pay for it.  But, similar to knowledgeable collectors becoming fewer and fewer, I think there are fewer and fewer of these clients around.  From a personal perspective, when these clients place an order it is exciting from the production end, because these are usually jobs that push your boundaries a bit and require you to really engage your creative side.  But if I am right and there are fewer of these types of clients, it means that high-end customized furniture and craftsmanship will continue to be relegated to its niche.  And, without getting too Malthusian, we will continue to see a dwindling of the bespoke production trades in America.  Small talented craftspeople and firms will need to find others ways to stay relevant.

I pulled this post together quickly and did not take the time to find supporting hard metrics.  Most of my opinions here are a result of my observations and then stumbling across this chair.  So please tell me what you think, or if you feel differently.  I would love to know.  Just one clarification: I do not place a value judgment on these two diffferent client groups – one is not superior to the other.  The 2 groups are themselves a gross over-simplification I used to illustrate what I think I see happening in our business.  In fact, sometimes the same client can act both “aspirational” and more custom oriented.   I simply want to note these observations to help us make more informed business decisions, and if I am lucky, some of our readers’ as well.

Yes, I’m joining the fray of debate surrounding what will happen next for Architectural Digest.  I was prompted by a lively post on the blog The Blue Remembered Hills.  There are lots of rumors floating around ranging from who will take the helm all the way to AD going out of business.  Any speculation on my part about who takes the lead there, would be just that – uphelpful speculation.  But my secret hope is that AD will use this chance to substantially re-invent themselves.  Two recent New York Times articles on Elle Decor and Lonny might provide some clues as to how to do that.

You may have your own opinions on each of these publications, but both of these magazines are doing something right.  Most importanly, both have embraced new media outlets.  With a more developped infrastructure, Elle Decor has been able to strengthen their brand with reality TV and social media, while other publications have folded.  Lonny also has a strong social media presence, and perhaps the most compelling format for a “publication” out there – and at a faction of the infrastructure and, I’m guessing here, a fraction of the cost.

AD already has perhaps one of the best brand names to build on.  It is occaisionally subject to some criticism regarding its content, but you always find top-end decorators’ work there.  The problem for some of the critics is perhaps that top-end does not always equal cutting edge.  As someone in the trade, seeing these decorators’ work is informative, and sometimes inspriational, but I would not consider it a trade resource. 

So, my wishlist for this re-invention of AD:  That the next editor is able to somehow marry the best parts of a traditional publication and an online one, while building on AD’s high end reputation by being more of a resource for high-end decorators and designers.   I can just see a junior decorator somewhere reading AD on his/her iPad and bookmarking the links of the pieces she/he likes to a “look-book” folder.  But I may be dreaming…

It is safe to say that our industry is undergoing major changes, and in my opinion, those are usally associated with inflection points during which new paradigms are put in place.  For our trade publications, in case the closure of House & Garden, Metropolitian Home and others wasn’t a clear enough sign, they need to change as well.  My fear is that the publishers of AD will make a safe pick with someone who hews too closely to their current formula.  In my opinion, this will simply be putting off the inevitable folding of the magazine.