[Leica] Re: yo-yo marketing and film?

[Summicron1 at aol.com (Summicron1@aol.com)]

duncan in the 1950s was a classic case of too much success too soon ruining 
a 
company -- they were like coleco with cabbage patch dolls -- the damn things 
took off swamping production and distribution capacity, the company ended up 
spending a bundle to air-ship special wood (hard rock maple) from vermont or 
wherever, and more money cranking out toys on overtime, and more shipping 
like 
crazy to meet demand, all the while hoping the booom would last and 
eventually 
larger market share would pay for it all.

it didn't, like subsequent yo-yo and other fad busts. The loss of the 
trademark later on was an aftershock.

Ilford isn't int he same situatione exactly, but being a large company 
having 
to contract capacity is never easy and can be fatal, especially if the 
company has been sold and the new owners have debt to pay off. In that 
situation, 
the market for the product almost becomes irrelevant because even if they 
are 
meeting their ongoing costs -- making more than they spend to produce the 
product -- the debt soaks up all the excess and then some, and it becomes a 
losing 
proposition.

this is why i try to live debt free, by the way -- ur never really 
independend and able to react to changes if you are in debt to someone else.

c trentelman 
In a message dated 9/6/04 11:19:52 AM, lug-request@leica-users.org writes:


> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Now that's funny; both companies ended up in bankruptcy.?? But I betcha the
> lawyers did OK.?
> 
> -dan c.
> 
> At 10:42 AM 06-09-04 EDT, SonC@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >1965?? Yo-yo market drops after huge fad. Duncan loses landmark court 
> battle
> >with Royal Tops Company over Duncan's trademark on the word "Yo-Yo." Name 
> is
> >ruled a generic term. Legal costs force both companies into bankruptcy.
>