Thoughts on High End vs High Quality

[Smitty37]

Which would you rather have? Or would you rather have both?

When you sell a high end pen to a business executive you are probably taking a customer from one of the "big name" expensive pen makers. Why should he buy from you instead of Mont Blanc? Because when someone sees your pen and asks where he got it, he can casually say "Oh this, I had it custom made by a Master Pen Maker, and it writes as good as it looks. Here try it." That, btw will carry more prestige than saying "It's a Mont Blanc"

Move that down the line to a Low End pen you gave to a relative. The chances are that if someone sees that pen and asks the same question...they might say "Oh this, my 2nd cousin twice removed from Poland, NY makes them and gave me one - and it writes even better than it looks - here try it."

While each above case is from a different end of the "kit" spectrum, they can each represent high quality and if you are selling pens across the spectrum that is exactly what you want them to do.

That's the reason I maintain that quality is conformance to specification, "luxury" has to do with the specification. If you specify a pen made of gold, all other things being equal it will cost a lot more than one made of aluminum. It will cost more even if the workmanship and outward appearance is not as good. Simply because the price of gold is a ton higher than the price of aluminum


In short, two component sets can be of equal quality but have vastly different prices based on luxury. Both can have equally good (or bad) workmanship, plating application, fit and finish, yet one may sell for a much higher price because of the design, size, plating material(s) etc.

So the question (asked often) What is the "best" quality pen kit can never be answered as long as we use the term "quality" to mean either quality or luxury depending on how we feel and each of us has our own opinion as to what 'quality' is.

 

[ed4copies]

I once lost an order, after it was delivered. Refunded $400.

Why? The customer was a pen collector and, although he had seen the pen "kit" I was making, he had not closely examined it until his was delivered.

His objections? The nib did not screw in, smoothly (subjective, yes, but it WAS HIS pen!!). The nib was "scratchy" (this was before I knew how to "tune" a nib).

My work and the work of my "blank-maker" (a black circuit board) won high praise, but the components didn't measure up to his expectations. So, were they "poor quality"??

I'd say yes. IF anyone wrote a spec that said, "the nib threads can be for sh!t, just give it to me cheap", the kit was "quality" by your definition. By my definition, it was NOT.

Not to be argumentative, just to contribute to the debate about how to define "quality".

Ed

 

[Big]

I have so much to learn. I will be wanting to make high "quality" pens based on quality of the kit, etc.

 

[nativewooder]

Quite a few people sell kits for hundreds of dollars but that does not mean that they are high quality. To me, "quality" is a joint effort of the manufacturer (if the mfg. claims "quality" in everything they sell) and the pen maker. Does he/she claim to build only "quality" pens. To me, "High End" indicates a high price and has nothing to do with "quality".

 

[Smitty37]

I once lost an order, after it was delivered. Refunded $400.

Why? The customer was a pen collector and, although he had seen the pen "kit" I was making, he had not closely examined it until his was delivered.

His objections? The nib did not screw in, smoothly (subjective, yes, but it WAS HIS pen!!). The nib was "scratchy" (this was before I knew how to "tune" a nib).

My work and the work of my "blank-maker" (a black circuit board) won high praise, but the components didn't measure up to his expectations. So, were they "poor quality"??

I'd say yes. IF anyone wrote a spec that said, "the nib threads can be for sh!t, just give it to me cheap", the kit was "quality" by your definition. By my definition, it was NOT.

Not to be argumentative, just to contribute to the debate about how to define "quality".

Ed

Your problem is with the spec Ed. Unstated there is an implied specification and opinions come into play, some buyers might have been perfectly happy with the pen you provided others not - stated the way you worded your hyplthetical spec the pen you made was a quality pen

How about the pen that is a lowly classic with a well tuned pelican nib and writes smoother than silk but look uuglier than a three toothed hob goblin with a case of hives? Depending on the specification that might or might not be a quality pen, it depends on what the spec says about the aesthetics.

 

[sbell111]

I once lost an order, after it was delivered. Refunded $400.

Why? The customer was a pen collector and, although he had seen the pen "kit" I was making, he had not closely examined it until his was delivered.

His objections? The nib did not screw in, smoothly (subjective, yes, but it WAS HIS pen!!). The nib was "scratchy" (this was before I knew how to "tune" a nib).

My work and the work of my "blank-maker" (a black circuit board) won high praise, but the components didn't measure up to his expectations. So, were they "poor quality"??

I'd say yes. IF anyone wrote a spec that said, "the nib threads can be for sh!t, just give it to me cheap", the kit was "quality" by your definition. By my definition, it was NOT.

Not to be argumentative, just to contribute to the debate about how to define "quality".

Ed

I think that you are saying the same thing as Smitty. You are just using a loose definition of quality. He avoided this in the thread's title by defining the topic as 'high end' v. 'high quality'. In my mind, what you apparently sold your customer was either a 'low end' kit that met it's quality standards or a 'high end' kit that failed it's quality standards (assuming that the low end kits have quality standards that allow for scratchy screwing and the specifications for high end kits require smooth screwing). Based solely on your post, it's impossible to know which.

 

[ed4copies]

Steve, I would contend that "smooth" threads should be present on every pen component. As pen-turners, and pen-sellers, we certainly would not request that threads be "rough".

Although I am NOT a machinist, I have hand-threaded steel. Not rocket science--just lubricate and cut carefully. Clearly the material cost of a set of components is next to nothing--so the careful execution of making the part is what we are buying (along with a ton of shipping costs and ziplock bag cost).

I don't see how we can say ANY kit is "quality", if it has any "performance" problems.

Again, not trying to be argumentative--everyone is entitled to their own "expectation level". The above is MY expectation.

Ed

 

[sbell111]

Steve, I would contend that "smooth" threads should be present on every pen component. As pen-turners, and pen-sellers, we certainly would not request that threads be "rough".

No, but you (or whoever had those parts made) would certainly have to make cost v. quality decisions. This would result in 'rough' kits that don't cost much. and 'smooth' kits that cost much more. Both of these would have an acceptable quality if they met the prescribed standards.

 

[Smitty37]

Steve, I would contend that "smooth" threads should be present on every pen component. As pen-turners, and pen-sellers, we certainly would not request that threads be "rough".

Although I am NOT a machinist, I have hand-threaded steel. Not rocket science--just lubricate and cut carefully. Clearly the material cost of a set of components is next to nothing--so the careful execution of making the part is what we are buying (along with a ton of shipping costs and ziplock bag cost).

I don't see how we can say ANY kit is "quality", if it has any "performance" problems.

Again, not trying to be argumentative--everyone is entitled to their own "expectation level". The above is MY expectation.

Ed

Agreed, unless stated otherwise in the spec.

You have selected an example where the spec should be the same or essentially the same for either a high end or a low end kit and both should have to meet the same criteria (with regard to operation of threaded parts). But, if the smoothness of threading is a variable, then one might expect the operation of the higher end kit to be a little smoother, they would still expect the lower end kit to be smooth.

You described a classic quality control issue - something did not work as it should and did not meet specification (implied specification). But it would not have mattered if you had sold something for much less money, the customer would have had the same complaint. Now it is very possible that both of the customer's complaints could have been fixed and if they could be and were fixed his return of the pen would not have been justified.

 

[Smitty37]

My contention in this thread is that High End and High Quality are not synomynous (or should not be) and should not be used interchangeably when referring to our product. A high end product with defects may still be high end for other reasons - if a pen kit contains an ounce of gold it's going to be a high end pen kit regardless of the fit and finish, simply containing an ounce of gold assures that is high end - it can also be but does not have to be a high quality pen kit depending on other factors like the spec for fit and finish.

To have effective quality control, the kit makers must have a specification for almost everything regardless of the price of the kit. And they must define acceptable and not acceptable limits expressed in terms that can be measured in some fashion. If you want higher quality you make the limits tighter and depending on the process that may or may not make the item more expensive (usually but not always it will). If it does, you must make an economic decision.

 

[mark james]

IMHO. I would like both and will pay a premium for them. If pushed to choose between the two... I'll go for quality; that is when the blank can take over (which is up to me, not the vendor).

 

[JTisher]

So then how am I, as a consumer, suppose to make an informed decision when none of the kit sellers offer the spec sheets for any pens.

I think the big issue is how tight the specs are when the kit itself is assembled. I personally measure the parts so I know what to turn to and more than .003 variance in a kit shows poor control.

However from kit to kit it doesn't matter if one pen winds up being .050 bigger than the next because the eye won't pick up the difference from pen to pen

Just my thoughts on it,
Joe

 

[designer]

Every aspect of a kit has idiosyncrasies that would need to be specified in detail and followed. For example:

Plating. Is the raw material within specified raw material requirements? Is the complete process for plating under 100% control? Does the final inspection meet the product requirements specified? Before that even, does the process meet the requirements set forth in the process specification? There are specs for everything.

Does the transmission have a torque factor range that it must meet? If so, did it meet the requirement? Is there data to support the results?

Dimensional is a no brainer. Is it to print or not? That would include surface conditions. Is the surface roughness within product requirements? Are they even specified at this point in the game?

Threads are another whole new ball game. 6g,6h, 4g6g, 4g6h? What finish spec is used for surface roughness on them? Different from the surface roughness of the cast or turned parts for sure. Are they cut threads or rolled threads? Different requirements once again. Of course materials change would change the effect of them as well. Metal on metal or plastic on plastic or wood on plastic.

Surface discontinuities. All wood has them. Just to what extent. What about the metal parts? Cracks, seams, laps and divots (no I am not a golfer). What does a "specification" allow or disallow? Is it measureable during mfg and final inspection?

Okay that is just some examples of "quality control". Old school I agree, but they are and continue to be refined today.

In todays day and age, customer satisfaction and perception is also paramount in the quality arena.

Every single aspect of a pen or pencil can be within the "specification" (I don't think they actually exist specifically for writing instruments). Maybe right on the ragged edge, but within limits of acceptability to each of the individual requirements. Now the customer sees it and uses it and complains. It is not shiny enough. It is too shiny. The rotation to extend the point is too easy. The ink line is too thin or too thick.

Is the quality of the finished product good or bad? To the individual "specifications" yes. To them, bad. To the next customer, maybe excellent. Perception is a large part of quality and customer satisfaction both.


Who is right and who is wrong? The manufacturer may show data that says everything is just fine and would be right at that point. Well until the specifications might be tightened up to improve the final product. At that point the previous data would be worthless and non-compliant.


Is it the manufacturer of the kit or the sales person that is responsible for the customer satisfaction? Well sales is the front line and as many here have noted, there are a lot of ways to convince the customer that it is what he wanted. Is it the pen turner and assembler (maybe the sales person is the same)? FFF. Fit form and function. Is it possible to define all three for every single individual? Yes, but do you really have that much time to spare with every single customer before making a custom unit for them? If you do, will that possibly equate out to other sales to make the time investment worth it? That is an individual decision, not mine.


TQM Total Quality Management. From the customer backwards to the raw material. Sales, engineering, quality, manufacturing etc. Do you control all that? No just parts of it.


Is it possible for "high end" and "high quality" to exist together? Sure it is. Does that require more than available at this time and date? Probably.



Just some things I thought I would throw out for thought.

 

[Smitty37]

Every aspect of a kit has idiosyncrasies that would need to be specified in detail and followed. For example:

Plating. Is the raw material within specified raw material requirements? Is the complete process for plating under 100% control? Does the final inspection meet the product requirements specified? Before that even, does the process meet the requirements set forth in the process specification? There are specs for everything.

Does the transmission have a torque factor range that it must meet? If so, did it meet the requirement? Is there data to support the results?

Dimensional is a no brainer. Is it to print or not? That would include surface conditions. Is the surface roughness within product requirements? Are they even specified at this point in the game?

Threads are another whole new ball game. 6g,6h, 4g6g, 4g6h? What finish spec is used for surface roughness on them? Different from the surface roughness of the cast or turned parts for sure. Are they cut threads or rolled threads? Different requirements once again. Of course materials change would change the effect of them as well. Metal on metal or plastic on plastic or wood on plastic.

Surface discontinuities. All wood has them. Just to what extent. What about the metal parts? Cracks, seams, laps and divots (no I am not a golfer). What does a "specification" allow or disallow? Is it measureable during mfg and final inspection?

Okay that is just some examples of "quality control". Old school I agree, but they are and continue to be refined today.

In todays day and age, customer satisfaction and perception is also paramount in the quality arena.

Every single aspect of a pen or pencil can be within the "specification" (I don't think they actually exist specifically for writing instruments). Maybe right on the ragged edge, but within limits of acceptability to each of the individual requirements. Now the customer sees it and uses it and complains. It is not shiny enough. It is too shiny. The rotation to extend the point is too easy. The ink line is too thin or too thick.

Is the quality of the finished product good or bad? To the individual "specifications" yes. To them, bad. To the next customer, maybe excellent. Perception is a large part of quality and customer satisfaction both.


Who is right and who is wrong? The manufacturer may show data that says everything is just fine and would be right at that point. Well until the specifications might be tightened up to improve the final product. At that point the previous data would be worthless and non-compliant.


Is it the manufacturer of the kit or the sales person that is responsible for the customer satisfaction? Well sales is the front line and as many here have noted, there are a lot of ways to convince the customer that it is what he wanted. Is it the pen turner and assembler (maybe the sales person is the same)? FFF. Fit form and function. Is it possible to define all three for every single individual? Yes, but do you really have that much time to spare with every single customer before making a custom unit for them? If you do, will that possibly equate out to other sales to make the time investment worth it? That is an individual decision, not mine.


TQM Total Quality Management. From the customer backwards to the raw material. Sales, engineering, quality, manufacturing etc. Do you control all that? No just parts of it.


Is it possible for "high end" and "high quality" to exist together? Sure it is. Does that require more than available at this time and date? Probably.



Just some things I thought I would throw out for thought.

Yep....and if Deming had never gone to Japan and the Japanese had not taken him and his statistical process control methods for quality control seriously we might still be hunting for answers put in simple terms he said control the process with real time feedback and you will control the quality of the output. Implementing it is a lot more complex than that but it does work....and I suspect is used in some form by most component makers....take random samples throughout the process and fix any problems that arise before continuing and you'll produce products that meet spec.

That does not imply that you will NEVER get a bad component but it does imply that you can get almost all good ones. Most of the kit quality problems reported back to me are packaging errors (duplicate parts or a part missing) where statistical methods can't be used because the batch sizes prohibit automated packaging.

 

[designer]

Not always random samples to verify the current process. Sometimes it is at specified increments due to the stability or instability of the specific process. Back to engineering and quality working together to eliminate variances in conformance to product requirements.

 

[Dan Hintz]

I do not consider "high end" and "high quality" to be synonymous...

BUT

I would expect "high end" to include "high quality" in its specifications by its very nature.

I would not consider something to hold the attribute of "high end" if it was not also of "high quality". Rough threads, as mentioned earlier, do not equate to "high quality", and therefore I would never expect such a thing on a item that is purportedly "high end".

One follows the other, but not necessarily in the reverse. I can put a "high quality" twist mechanism in a slimline... but few would equate a slimline with "high end".

 

[Smitty37]

Not always random samples to verify the current process. Sometimes it is at specified increments due to the stability or instability of the specific process. Back to engineering and quality working together to eliminate variances in conformance to product requirements.

True enough, but we need to limit the details so people can understand. Also, it has been about 25 years since I was actively involved in this sort of thing so my recollections are a bit hazy and I would imagine that technology advances have changed procedures and processes somewhat.

 

[Smitty37]

I do not consider "high end" and "high quality" to be synonymous...

BUT

I would expect "high end" to include "high quality" in its specifications by its very nature.

I would not consider something to hold the attribute of "high end" if it was not also of "high quality". Rough threads, as mentioned earlier, do not equate to "high quality", and therefore I would never expect such a thing on a item that is purportedly "high end".

One follows the other, but not necessarily in the reverse. I can put a "high quality" twist mechanism in a slimline... but few would equate a slimline with "high end".

Most people wouldn't either...but something does not move from high end down because it contains a quality defect.

Mercedez does not become a low end car because they have a recall for some safety (quality) issue. Nor does a Ford Focus become a high end car because they don't have a recall for safety issues. Lamborghini was introduced in 1963 and it was a high end car...people who owned them loved them but they spent more time in the garage being tuned and repaired than being driven. They were hand built, high end and innovative, but not high quality.

A 5 carat diamond ring with a visible defect is still a 5 carat diamond ring and as rings go it will still cost a lot more than a 1/2 carat diamond ring with everything perfect. And a lot of people would rather own the high end with an imperfection than the perfect low end.

Those are the things that cause me to believe that we need to separate luxury from quality. As I said earlier a kit containing 1 ounce of 24K gold is going to be a high end kit regardless of how poorly it is made.

 

[maxwell_smart007]

High quality - well made and well appointed

High End - rare or luxurious additions

quality CAN come cheap - high end cannot.

 

[edstreet]

In short, two component sets can be of equal quality but have vastly different prices based on luxury. Both can have equally good (or bad) workmanship, plating application, fit and finish, yet one may sell for a much higher price because of the design, size, plating material(s) etc.

So the question (asked often) What is the "best" quality pen kit can never be answered as long as we use the term "quality" to mean either quality or luxury depending on how we feel and each of us has our own opinion as to what 'quality' is.

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As for the last paragraph goes, is there a question there somewhere? I think I may have missed it. Seems to start off asking a question end ends the sentence with a heavy opinionated statement while the question seems lost.

 

[Smitty37]

In short, two component sets can be of equal quality but have vastly different prices based on luxury. Both can have equally good (or bad) workmanship, plating application, fit and finish, yet one may sell for a much higher price because of the design, size, plating material(s) etc.

So the question (asked often) What is the "best" quality pen kit can never be answered as long as we use the term "quality" to mean either quality or luxury depending on how we feel and each of us has our own opinion as to what 'quality' is.

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As for the last paragraph goes, is there a question there somewhere? I think I may have missed it. Seems to start off asking a question end ends the sentence with a heavy opinionated statement while the question seems lost.

Sorry Ed, I know your postings well enough to know that you do not speak for the "general public" regardless of how often you claim that you do. And this thread has nothing to do with what "they" are called. It has to do with how the word 'quality' is used.

Read the last paragraph again Ed you obviously did miss something.

 

[Chasper]

I almost hate it when I agree with you Smitty, but high end means high price and high quality means adhering to standards, or specifications. Although I would add that adhering to high standards is much better than adhering to low standards. In all cases if the pen doesn't write, if the threading is rough, if the fit and finish are sloppy, if the click mechanism isn't smooth, then the pen fails and is not acceptable at any price.

However, the point that this entire thread ignores up to this point is that quality is a highly nuanced word, depending on the the view of the buyer or seller. Start with excellent writing, fine craftsmanship in the manufacturing of the components as well as the turning and assembly, if there is not also an element of creativity, it will not be perceived as quality and worthy of pricing at the high end. Call it creativity, artistry, beauty, whatever; if it doesn't have it, and it doesn't allow the potential buyer to project an impression of individuality, sophistication, good taste and status, then it isn't a pen worthy of being called high quality or high end.

 

[Smitty37]

I almost hate it when I agree with you Smitty, but high end means high price and high quality means adhering to standards, or specifications. Although I would add that adhering to high standards is much better than adhering to low standards. In all cases if the pen doesn't write, if the threading is rough, if the fit and finish are sloppy, if the click mechanism isn't smooth, then the pen fails and is not acceptable at any price.

However, the point that this entire thread ignores up to this point is that quality is a highly nuanced word, depending on the the view of the buyer or seller. Start with excellent writing, fine craftsmanship in the manufacturing of the components as well as the turning and assembly, if there is not also an element of creativity, it will not be perceived as quality and worthy of pricing at the high end. Call it creativity, artistry, beauty, whatever; if it doesn't have it, and it doesn't allow the potential buyer to project an impression of individuality, sophistication, good taste and status, then it isn't a pen worthy of being called high quality or high end.

Some of the specifications will often be the same regardless of price i.e. suitibility to use - a pen has to write whether it costs 10 cents or 10 thousand dollars

That is what this thread is about.

The list of items is very subjective and will vary from person to person, location to location culture to culture and many other factors.

 

[sbell111]

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As I stated in the other thread, I am of the opinion that 'kit' is a poor descripter for these items. As such, why should I continue to call them kits just because some people rant about it? Honestly, I find that there is more snobbishness exhibited by people who demand that people keep calling them 'kits' then those who simply call them components. It seems that these people believe that the force of their own will should be sufficient to undo a a reasoned decision that has been made. Why does it even matter to anyone that people use the word 'components'?

It should also be noted that I disagree with your assertion that anyone is losing sales because they use the word 'components' instead of 'kits'.

With that said, if you think that it is a problem that people are laughing behind other's backs, don't participate in this boorish behavior.

 

[Krash]

In short, two component sets can be of equal quality but have vastly different prices based on luxury. Both can have equally good (or bad) workmanship, plating application, fit and finish, yet one may sell for a much higher price because of the design, size, plating material(s) etc.

So the question (asked often) What is the "best" quality pen kit can never be answered as long as we use the term "quality" to mean either quality or luxury depending on how we feel and each of us has our own opinion as to what 'quality' is.

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As for the last paragraph goes, is there a question there somewhere? I think I may have missed it. Seems to start off asking a question end ends the sentence with a heavy opinionated statement while the question seems lost.

I'm not sure I agree with everything you said. When I hear "kit", I think of the old Heathkit or moccasin kits I got at Tandy long ago. Those kits had everything you needed to make what was on the picture. PSI and others offer kits on their sites and you get a bag with everything you need to make the pen. I would classify the current pen kits, or pen components, in the same area as a canvass or paints to a painter, parts that go into the whole that can be manipulated artistically. You can also buy paint kits but I don't see anyone attaching them to the Mona Lisa. I believe we dug our own grave here by calling the components "kits" to start with and it may be a hard association to shake.

And, I think the last paragraph is a statement sentence that uses a question as its basis. Probably, and I'm not an english wiz, a more correct way would have been to put a question mark after "What is the "best" quality pen kit" so that it was clearer. But, that said, I got what he was saying and it was clear to me.

 

[Smitty37]

In short, two component sets can be of equal quality but have vastly different prices based on luxury. Both can have equally good (or bad) workmanship, plating application, fit and finish, yet one may sell for a much higher price because of the design, size, plating material(s) etc.

So the question (asked often) What is the "best" quality pen kit can never be answered as long as we use the term "quality" to mean either quality or luxury depending on how we feel and each of us has our own opinion as to what 'quality' is.

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As for the last paragraph goes, is there a question there somewhere? I think I may have missed it. Seems to start off asking a question end ends the sentence with a heavy opinionated statement while the question seems lost.

I'm not sure I agree with everything you said. When I hear "kit", I think of the old Heathkit or moccasin kits I got at Tandy long ago. Those kits had everything you needed to make what was on the picture. PSI and others offer kits on their sites and you get a bag with everything you need to make the pen. I would classify the current pen kits, or pen components, in the same area as a canvass or paints to a painter, parts that go into the whole that can be manipulated artistically. You can also buy paint kits but I don't see anyone attaching them to the Mona Lisa. I believe we dug our own grave here by calling the components "kits" to start with and it may be a hard association to shake.

And, I think the last paragraph is a statement sentence that uses a question as its basis. Probably, and I'm not an english wiz, a more correct way would have been to put a question mark after "What is the "best" quality pen kit" so that it was clearer. But, that said, I got what he was saying and it was clear to me.

Actually it probably should have been in quotes with a question mark within the quotes...it is part of the longer sentence and does not stand on it's own. Or perhaps I should have stated it separately. What I am saying is "Here is an often asked question that can never be answered....
The longer sentence is a statement....

 

[Dan Hintz]

Most people wouldn't either...but something does not move from high end down because it contains a quality defect.

Mercedez does not become a low end car because they have a recall for some safety (quality) issue. Nor does a Ford Focus become a high end car because they don't have a recall for safety issues. Lamborghini was introduced in 1963 and it was a high end car...people who owned them loved them but they spent more time in the garage being tuned and repaired than being driven. They were hand built, high end and innovative, but not high quality.

Let me provide another example that I think speaks to your Mercedes/Ford example.

Let's say I used an inspection scope to look inside the tube of a pen kit. Using my earlier (and somewhat vague) description, one might argue that a "high end" kit might have a perfectly polished tube, whereas the "high quality" kit might get away with a rough tube. The roughness of the tube has zero effect on the operation, yet the extra time spent on polishing the "high end" kit commands extra money. No change in operation, no change in quality, but one is placed into the "high end" category.

But such an operation would be wasted as even a connoisseur wouldn't waste his time looking for a polished inner barrel (and if they did, I would charge them an arm and a leg with some good advertising :tongue. As to Chasper's mention of "high end" being nuanced, I think that holds true to some degree or another. There is no valid reason to polish the inside of the tube, yet if you provided it as an option, some numbnuts out there would pay good money to have it. If one of those pens passed by me and didn't get polished, the item would not have any reduction in quality for its purpose (though we go back to the whole "not being in spec" question)... the perceived value might have been diminished (at least in the connoisseur's eye). Nuance, perception, etc.

If I remember correctly, BMW (Mercedes?) doesn't waste paint on the inside of their trunk lids. First time I saw that, I said "I thought BMW was a high-end vehicle? Why do they leave their trunks roughly painted?" The reply was a simple "People don't care what the inside of their trunk looks like, because no one sees it while you're driving down the road." Perception. Fair enough.

 

[edstreet]

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As I stated in the other thread, I am of the opinion that 'kit' is a poor descripter for these items. As such, why should I continue to call them kits just because some people rant about it? Honestly, I find that there is more snobbishness exhibited by people who demand that people keep calling them 'kits' then those who simply call them components. It seems that these people believe that the force of their own will should be sufficient to undo a a reasoned decision that has been made. Why does it even matter to anyone that people use the word 'components'?

It should also be noted that I disagree with your assertion that anyone is losing sales because they use the word 'components' instead of 'kits'.

With that said, if you think that it is a problem that people are laughing behind other's backs, don't participate in this boorish behavior.

Honestly I have not considered one angle you mentioned, that is snobbish from the kit crowd. I mostly see the other side, that of vendors telling me on the phone they would rather be sitting next to someone selling $1,000 pens rather than {censored} blanks because they are "to crafty". This crowd wants to part ways with 'kit' and yield a more classy phrase and call them 'components' and tell you they are of higher quality and higher value, which they are not.

Also I would like to point out the misnomer that "high quality" yields to 'standards' as you can have high quality garbage as well as low quality platinum. Yielding to standards is simply conformity and uniformity and does not denote quality. Uniformity is used to help increase quality on a production level but you can certainly have high quality with out adhering to uniformity.


My reference (dare I say jest?) to the 'kit' -vs- 'component' was also grossly over looking the fact that a label, i.e. "Mont Blanc" does not denote quality, what the label DOES denote is marketing campaigns to associate one thing with another, typically an idea, emotion, concept or the like. This very same concept holds true with the "made in the USA" push. It is simply a marketing ploy as you can have total crap "made in the usa".


As for missing out on sales due to mislabeling 'component'. If you do any search result analysis you will quickly find what people are looking for. You will also very clearly, and quickly see 'kit' has much higher weight value than 'component'. By denying yourself the label of 'kit' and calling them 'components' you are essentially trying to make yourself feel better for having lower quality items than what you want. Simple fact of the matter is the 'component' crowd has very little to no pull for the community to break them apart; same holds true with the TBC crowd.



Personally topics of this nature is so wide spread and diverse the only real effective way to deal with them is to use the vendor forums and *SHOW* the community quality. If you present simple facts and proof undeniable, i.e. detailed photograph, to the public and allow them to make up their own minds as to quality/etc then you will go further than if you make up labels and attempt to push the public into over inflated marketing labels. Photo's are absolute and removes the he said she said from the equation.

 

[Smitty37]

Most people wouldn't either...but something does not move from high end down because it contains a quality defect.

Mercedez does not become a low end car because they have a recall for some safety (quality) issue. Nor does a Ford Focus become a high end car because they don't have a recall for safety issues. Lamborghini was introduced in 1963 and it was a high end car...people who owned them loved them but they spent more time in the garage being tuned and repaired than being driven. They were hand built, high end and innovative, but not high quality.

Let me provide another example that I think speaks to your Mercedes/Ford example.

Let's say I used an inspection scope to look inside the tube of a pen kit. Using my earlier (and somewhat vague) description, one might argue that a "high end" kit might have a perfectly polished tube, whereas the "high quality" kit might get away with a rough tube. The roughness of the tube has zero effect on the operation, yet the extra time spent on polishing the "high end" kit commands extra money. No change in operation, no change in quality, but one is placed into the "high end" category.

But such an operation would be wasted as even a connoisseur wouldn't waste his time looking for a polished inner barrel (and if they did, I would charge them an arm and a leg with some good advertising :tongue. As to Chasper's mention of "high end" being nuanced, I think that holds true to some degree or another. There is no valid reason to polish the inside of the tube, yet if you provided it as an option, some numbnuts out there would pay good money to have it. If one of those pens passed by me and didn't get polished, the item would not have any reduction in quality for its purpose (though we go back to the whole "not being in spec" question)... the perceived value might have been diminished (at least in the connoisseur's eye). Nuance, perception, etc.

If I remember correctly, BMW (Mercedes?) doesn't waste paint on the inside of their trunk lids. First time I saw that, I said "I thought BMW was a high-end vehicle? Why do they leave their trunks roughly painted?" The reply was a simple "People don't care what the inside of their trunk looks like, because no one sees it while you're driving down the road." Perception. Fair enough.

Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (Bavarian Motor Works in English I think-{BMW}) and Mercedes-Benz are not the same company.

I'm not sure I get your point. But you seem to be getting into the cost/price arena. Suffice to say, not all costs can be passed on from the seller to the buyer and your example is a case in point. The cost of an unnecessary operation that does not improve the product will never be recovered.

 

[JP61]

High End should be High Quality in every regard. If it isn't, it's not high end.

 

[sbell111]

This is what annoys the general public when they hear 'component set', regardless of how much lipstick you put on the pig it's still a pig. Same holds true here, regardless of what you refer to it as, no matter how snobbish you wish to be about it it's still a pen kit. You and the rest of the crowd is not fooling anyone and there are plenty of jokes and the like shared behind your back about calling them component sets. Not to mention loosing business.

As I stated in the other thread, I am of the opinion that 'kit' is a poor descripter for these items. As such, why should I continue to call them kits just because some people rant about it? Honestly, I find that there is more snobbishness exhibited by people who demand that people keep calling them 'kits' then those who simply call them components. It seems that these people believe that the force of their own will should be sufficient to undo a a reasoned decision that has been made. Why does it even matter to anyone that people use the word 'components'?

It should also be noted that I disagree with your assertion that anyone is losing sales because they use the word 'components' instead of 'kits'.

With that said, if you think that it is a problem that people are laughing behind other's backs, don't participate in this boorish behavior.

Honestly I have not considered one angle you mentioned, that is snobbish from the kit crowd. I mostly see the other side, that of vendors telling me on the phone they would rather be sitting next to someone selling $1,000 pens rather than {censored} blanks because they are "to crafty". This crowd wants to part ways with 'kit' and yield a more classy phrase and call them 'components' and tell you they are of higher quality and higher value, which they are not.

I'm trying to make sense of thise paragraph, but I am having much difficulty.

Apparently, you are talking to vendors at shows where both high end pens and raw pen blanks are sold and those vendors would rather be neighbors with finished pen sellers instead of pen blank sellers. Further, these vendors also wish that we would use the term 'components' instead of 'kits', but that no one should lie about the components' quality.

If I am understanding your post correctly, I have to wonder why I should care, beyone agreeing that everyone should be truthful about the quality of their merchandise.

<Deleted paragraph that didn't appear to have anything to do with my post.>

My reference (dare I say jest?) to the 'kit' -vs- 'component' was also grossly over looking the fact that a label, i.e. "Mont Blanc" does not denote quality, what the label DOES denote is marketing campaigns to associate one thing with another, typically an idea, emotion, concept or the like. This very same concept holds true with the "made in the USA" push. It is simply a marketing ploy as you can have total crap "made in the usa".

OK. Why is this a problem?

If you think that calling these items 'components' instead of 'kits' is merely a marketing ploy, why is that a bad thing?

It should be noted that I don't think that it's merely a marketing ploy. Rather, I believe that it is simply using more exact verbiage to avoid misunderstandings.

As for missing out on sales due to mislabeling 'component'. If you do any search result analysis you will quickly find what people are looking for. You will also very clearly, and quickly see 'kit' has much higher weight value than 'component'.

I think that what you are saying here is that sellers of pen 'kits' would tend to have more sales if they use the word 'kit' instead of 'components' because more people will find them through Google searches. That's probably correct and if we were all component vendors, I assume that it would be a good conversation to have. For those who sell pens instead of parts, however, the inverse is correct. It is far more likely that the sale (or show) will be lost if we use the word 'kits' instead of 'components'.

By denying yourself the label of 'kit' and calling them 'components' you are essentially trying to make yourself feel better for having lower quality items than what you want.

Ummm, No. If you believe that, then you've only been reading your posts. I'll try again.

I believe that 'kit' is a poor descripter because that's not what these things are. They are a bag of parts. They include some of the items that a person will need to handcraft a pen. As such, they are components (or parts), not a 'kit'.

Further, by misapplying the word 'kit' to these items, we give an incorrect description to both show organizers and customers that injures our ability to sell our product.

Simple fact of the matter is the 'component' crowd has very little to no pull for the community to break them apart; same holds true with the TBC crowd.

I have no idea who or what it is that you are suggesting should be 'broken up'.

Personally topics of this nature is so wide spread and diverse the only real effective way to deal with them is to use the vendor forums and *SHOW* the community quality. If you present simple facts and proof undeniable, i.e. detailed photograph, to the public and allow them to make up their own minds as to quality/etc then you will go further than if you make up labels and attempt to push the public into over inflated marketing labels. Photo's are absolute and removes the he said she said from the equation.

I don't know how pretty pictures are going to change minds about the kit/component issue, but OK.

 

[Dan Hintz]

Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (Bavarian Motor Works in English I think-{BMW}) and Mercedes-Benz are not the same company.

I'm not sure I get your point. But you seem to be getting into the cost/price arena. Suffice to say, not all costs can be passed on from the seller to the buyer and your example is a case in point. The cost of an unnecessary operation that does not improve the product will never be recovered.

I wasn't suggesting BMW and Mercedes were the same company, only the possibility that Mercedes does the same as BMW wrt/painting trunks.

I got a bit lost in my reply since I was handling 5 projects at once. I was trying to get to the point of saying "Even a high-end company/product can have low-end items in their car... but I don't believe that makes the entire product low-end." The polished internal tube was where I was making the association (and failed to tie it in at the end).

A high-end pen with the polished tube internals is the same high-end pen without it (in most people's opinions, I would imagine)... it's a hidden item that doesn't add to the look/functionality of the pen as a whole. The BMW (or Mercedes) that has an item break (let's say it's an internal window crank) doesn't suddenly become a low-end item because it had a failure. There needs to be a separation of what the company as a whole is putting together versus what may happen outside of their control. If the manufacturer that supplies BMW said window crank piece had a bad batch of plastic, Mercedes didn't make a bad product... it was a mistake that even the crank manufacturer didn't catch until things started going bad.

Is BMW at fault for installing a bad crank, or can we say that accidents happen in manufacturing? What makes the product high-end is also in the service of that product. BMW fixes it for free and gives you a loaner car. If one of your pen's mechanisms break, you provide a new mechanism and ship it to the customer gratis.

 

[Smitty37]

High End should be High Quality in every regard. If it isn't, it's not high end.

I don't think that true in any practical sense. High End relates to value not conformance to spec.
A Ferrari can have a lot of defects and hence not really high quality, but still be wort a lot more and carry a lot more prestige than a Yugo even if the Yugo were to be perfect.

 

[JP61]

High End should be High Quality in every regard. If it isn't, it's not high end.

I don't think that true in any practical sense. High End relates to value not conformance to spec.
A Ferrari can have a lot of defects and hence not really high quality, but still be wort a lot more and carry a lot more prestige than a Yugo even if the Yugo were to be perfect.

:biggrin: That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it!

Key words - "in every regard"

When talking high-end products, how can you compare a Yugo with a Ferrari?

 

[mbroberg]

High End should be High Quality in every regard. If it isn't, it's not high end.

I don't think that true in any practical sense. High End relates to value not conformance to spec.
A Ferrari can have a lot of defects and hence not really high quality, but still be wort a lot more and carry a lot more prestige than a Yugo even if the Yugo were to be perfect.

According to Mr. Webster a High-end Product must be a Quality Product.

High-end - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Quality is, among other things:

"a high level of value or excellence"

"degree of excellence : grade <the quality of competing air service — Current Biography>

"superiority in kind <merchandise of quality> "

"very good or excellent"

Quality - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[Smitty37]

High End should be High Quality in every regard. If it isn't, it's not high end.

I don't think that true in any practical sense. High End relates to value not conformance to spec.
A Ferrari can have a lot of defects and hence not really high quality, but still be wort a lot more and carry a lot more prestige than a Yugo even if the Yugo were to be perfect.

According to Mr. Webster a High-end Product must be a Quality Product.

High-end - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Quality is, among other things:

"a high level of value or excellence"

"degree of excellence : grade <the quality of competing air service — Current Biography>

"superiority in kind <merchandise of quality> "

"very good or excellent"

Quality - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

You're right....Webster includes a lot of definitions for quality which if you use them all say it means whatever you want it to mean and he does not incude conformance to specification among them. Which is why he isn't in charge of producing anything manufactured.

 

[JP61]

You're right....Webster includes a lot of definitions for quality which if you use them all say it means whatever you want it to mean and he does not incude conformance to specification among them. Which is why he isn't in charge of producing anything manufactured.

:wink: Shame on Mr. Webster for not including the obvious!

 

[Smitty37]

Since the dictionary attempts to define all possible uses of a word it useful only if you know and acknowledge the context, The English language is very versatile with few words having just one meaning, which makes putting pricise meanings on any word difficult.

There are many words that have different meaning in a "legal" sense than they have in general usage, you will not find the legal definition for many of them in the typical dictionary. The same is true of industry.

Quality - meaning any attribute or feature obviously does not apply. Quality - meaning good or excellent and at the same time meaning 'superior' means nothing "good" is not usually associated with "superior".

Even the definition given for "high end" which is a relatively new usage being around less then 40 years leaves something to be desired by adding the words quality and sophistication to price sayin in essence that it must not only be high quality but very sophisticated to be high end. What part of a pen do you consider sophisticated? Today most high end items are defined only by price - if a seller says high end they usually mean high priced and nothing else.

With so many diverse definitions "quality" has to be put in context to have any meaning at all. But this conversation has stopped being useful in the context in which we are dealing so I'm going to drop off.

 

[JP61]

Whatever..... this thread/conversation was silly and pretty much useless from the start, in any context. However, you should sleep well tonight knowing that all other opinions posted here, are wrong. Ever hear of the saying "he's a legend in his own mind"?

 

[Smitty37]

Whatever..... this thread/conversation was silly and pretty much useless from the start, in any context. However, you should sleep well tonight knowing that all other opinions posted here, are wrong. Ever hear of the saying "he's a legend in his own mind"?

Keep your personal comments to yourself. I did not insult you or attempt to insult you.