Comments on: Episode 57: Has Gillette taken the “razor and blades” business model too far?

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:15:29 +0000

Gillette is just way toooo $$$expensive$$$ for the amount of “smooth” shaves you get out of a razor. I can’t believe people have not refused to purchase these Gillette products until their prices come down. I am.

By: Mike Oxley

Mike Oxley — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:27:22 +0000

Great post.

My guess is that the reason they compare the new product against their own blade rather than their nearest competitor is to keep them out of hot water (crappy pun intended). There is no scientific measure of “close shave”, so no matter how scientific they make their adverts look there is no claim they could make to both get past the regulator (in the uk at least) or avoid a lawsuit.

I wonder how a new entrant would compete? Would they go for 1 extra blade or something else? Could you offer a $150 shaver with free lifetime replacements and undercut the market?

By: Ben

Ben — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:27:57 +0000

Is there really any benefit to the Fusion over Mach 3. I tried it and didn’t notice any difference.

Then again, I’m fine with just the cheapest disposable, with no foam or anything. I never cut myself, and this talk about smoothness is baffling! It probably works out cheaper even if you only use them once.

But, Gilette do a good marketing job (and it sems a good product too). For if people like you do get some real benefit from them, there must be many more that just use it because it is the default choice. Now they want to push a more profitable product into greater prominance. (otherwise why would they bother?)

By: admin

admin — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:25:18 +0000

Hi Andy… It’s difficult to hone in on the theory without hard numbers from Gillette, so I’m primarily going from my experience of replacing less frequently, and then noticing that the commercials seemed to be urging me not to do so. Maybe it is true that the Fusion cartridges work more efficiently than the Mach 3, and thus they can justify charging a higher price for a better product.

Whether it’s getting a haircut, buying a new set of tires for your car, or upgrading your laptop, there are lots of areas in life that businesses can argue that you NEED to ‘upgrade’ for a better experience — and they could be right. But the consumer can always counter-argue that they can get by for another week, month, or year just fine.

Thanks for the comment

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:35:27 +0000

I don’t see how you can say the numbers bear out your theory, when all they show is that Fusion cartridges are more expensive than Mach 3. This is obvious; the Fusion has 66% more blades! As I understood it, your theory isn’t that Fusion cartridges are more expensive, but that men are replacing them less often due to cost. That would be a difficult thing to measure (perhaps look at ratio of number of shavers sold to number of cartridges sold for both Mach 3 and Fusion).

I would suggest that the decrease in frequency of replacement isn’t enough to offset the increased price of Fusion cartridges. If it were, then Gilette would have no reason to encourage men to switch.

I second your opinion that Fusion is an awesome product. Fusion is a big step up from Mach 3, which was itself a big step up from older models.

I also think the lower cartridge replacement frequency for Fusion isn’t strictly due to cost. I believe the Fusion cartridges actually provide a higher number of shaves before they become unacceptably dull.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:50:42 +0000

Thanks for the comment Jason. I could definitely see some combined form-factor.

By: Jason T

Jason T — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:33:13 +0000

It’s only a matter of time before Gilette announce a razor that has all the functionality of a 5-blade system but implemented with 1-blade!

By: Steven G. Harms

Steven G. Harms — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:04:33 +0000

All this demonstrates why I bought a $30 safety razor and high-quality stainless steel blades (I like Merkur from Deutschland).

You only need 10,000 blades IF they suck. It’s like wielding (Mach) 5 Frankish blades when what you need is one curved Damascus blade.

By: Chuck Warren

Chuck Warren — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:49:55 +0000

I use the Gilette Sensor (2 blades) and have for years. I see no reason to switch to anything else. If they want me to upgrade, better stop selling the cheaper alternative, because that’s what I’ll buy until it’s no longer available.

By: Chris Papadopoulos

Chris Papadopoulos — Sat, 23 May 2009 17:48:45 +0000

I recently switched to an old fashioned shaving system complete with just one razor blade instead of 3-5, and it’s a really good shave and cheaper in the long run too. You just have to buy really cheap razors, not the plastic thing that holds the blades too.

I’d bet that the razor companies will eventually compel people to look at some alternatives. The price of those multi-bladed things are ridiculous.

Good article.