Too many Chemical Guys re-labels.

jsatek · 12-19-07, 04:53

It seems every forum I go to now has a resident master detailer selling Chemical Guys (Warner) products with his own label on it. It's getting to the point of ridiculous.

Without naming company names, because so many are so sensitive to brand licensing and re-packaging like its a secret, sound off in the anonymous poll.

jsatek · 12-19-07, 05:50

I cant believe it, one hour down and its a 50/50 split!

I only see the two choices below.

1. Pay $24.99 for a gallon of XYZ

2. Pay $24.99 for 32oz. of XYZ with a different label.

And we arent talking about a Cartier or Hermes label. This is "Schlomo's Back Door Moonshine" Zero brand recognition in any part of the country. Unknown support, unknown product development, unknown management, unknown company history.

I'm not a Chemical Guys promoter, I only use a few of their products. But I just cant figure out what motivates the retail purchase. None of the products are ground breaking or industry changing. They are just XYZ chemical with a generic label and Hermes pricing. It defies just about everything written about marketing.

Setec Astronomy · 12-19-07, 05:56

Oh come on...it's like the Sneeches! Pretty soon everybody will have their own brand (even if they don't sell it...Q: "wow, that's shiny, what wax do you use on it?" A: "well, it's my own brand, Setec's Slippery As Snot on a Doorknob" {thanks, TC

} Q: "wow, where can I get some?" A: "sorry, not for sale, I just use it on my own cars" ) and no one will care anymore about brands or labels, they'll just think they are all the same...

wannafbody · 12-19-07, 05:58

Well here's my take on it. Chemical Guys is really helping the small guy who doesn't have the money to launch a line. They provide products and someone else markets them. It's a good marketing strategy. The downside is that at best they are average products some of which are now being sold at premium prices. I say the company most hurt by this is Megs. Maybe that's why Megs is focusing so much on the consumer market.

jsatek · 12-19-07, 06:04

Chemical Guys has a wonderful model, really I believe in it.

My wife was in brand licensing for years. Her company invented the market back in the 80's with Wendy's "Where's the Beef". They made it legal for someone to sell a t-shirt with "Where's the Beef" printed on it ONLY if they bought a license from the company.

Their bigeer clients are Harley-Davidson, Stanley Tools, Mary Kate & Ashley Olsen. There is nothing wrong with selling a product you dont make. If they all got caught up in the details of how to make Harley Davidson salt and pepper shakers, they woudl have no business to worry about.

kompressornsc · 12-19-07, 06:04

Nobody makes anything anymore, don't you know that.

It's all branding. I guess being in my business (promotional products / branding), I see it every day. I might have 300 suppliers selling the exact same pen that comes out of the exact same factory in China. It's difficult to stand out unless you have a very good marketing / branding plan.
I just sold some Cutter & Buck portfolios. Now C & B does not make portfolios (or anything else for that matter), but they license their name to be used on items. I think it was HangTen (clothing) that first came up with this novel approach a long, long time ago.

Setec Astronomy · 12-19-07, 06:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by wannafbody

I say the company most hurt by this is Megs. Maybe that's why Megs is focusing so much on the consumer market.

Megs is hurt by a handful of boutiques selling relabled CG's? Too bad they only have the 10,000 or so W-M's, Targets, AutoZones, Pep Boys, and Advanced to distribute through...it's tough all around...

jsatek · 12-19-07, 06:07

It's all about client relationships.

What is wrong is the vendors that get "irritated" when you call them out on it.

kompressorsc - everyone knows your pen comes from China, if you got angry and defensive when a client said, "Are you making these pens yourself boy!", you would look like a fool and lose the sale. Way of the world. These "boutique" salespeople need to start thinkning of an angle that sells the product. It is getting insulting.

jsatek · 12-19-07, 06:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

Megs is hurt by a handful of boutiques selling relabled CG's? Too bad they only have the 10,000 or so W-M's, Targets, AutoZones, Pep Boys, and Advanced to distribute through...it's tough all around...

Not the same market, Setec is correct. I'm positive that Meg's grosses in 60 minutes what most of these Chemical guys re-packs grosses in their lifetime. Different customer, diferent retail outlets, different business model.

I am shocked by the poll results.
From what the polls are telling, people want to see Pro-Detailer in another 56 different containers.

sspeer · 12-19-07, 06:56

The part I don't understand is why the supplier competes directly with their private label customers...yeah..they sell more gallon sized products, but they also sell alot of the 16 oz bottles

Any value IMO, is that you trust the private label to dig through the myriad of products and pick out the good ones... Some do tweak the formula a bit..or so they say..

In a way it's like a Meguiar's or Mothers in that you can shop around at different stores for the same, or extremely similar, product for a better price

BigJimZ28 · 12-19-07, 07:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by sspeer

The part I don't understand is why the supplier competes directly with their private label customers

How are they competing?
they sold the private lable stuff, it is money in ther pocket

I think it is a win-win for everybody

BigLeegr · 12-19-07, 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJimZ28

How are they competing?
they sold the private lable stuff, it is money in ther pocket

I think it is a win-win for everybody

I think it's in regards to the fact that CG seems to push their label to consumers and make things looks as close to other companies' products as possible, and thereby take sales from someone who may private label from them. For example-The ButterWax (ButteryWax, or whatever it's called today). If they (CG) are selling this product to a consumer with the intent of taking business away from the private label customer of theirs, it's competing. I also think it's lacking in business ethics. There should be some sort of "non-compete clause" in effect, but there doesn't seem to be in this case.