Pity there's no African American's here. I hear that grape flavor goes down well in some places.
@eggbert , I like to eat sashimi but that doesn't mean I want to smell like it, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the same is true for Afro-Americans and grape flavour. To imply otherwise could really come across in a manner other than what I'm
sure you intended.
@Anthony , RE: packaging - appreciate the backstory etc. I'm not talking about your packaging int he future etc - PERSONALLY I think you'll give yourself a real point of difference if you try and source a container that easily allows the user to load his brush without getting excess lather etc everywhere - e.g look at the ones that Soap Commander uses in the USA, I have read multiple feedback on people loving the packaging as its easier to use. Ones filled to the brim you can only barely twirl your brush in are a PITA. Its not a must have BUT if the marginal cost isn't prohibitive it shows you're understanding the user experience.
That said at present your soft soaps are (as you alluded to above and clearly shown from your vid) far more like creams. FWIW I wouldn't be averse to selling them instead as CREAMS. Most people here actively use them so it's not a weakness - but I still believe your base forumulation getting the best it can be and that includes the consistency is priority #1.
So RE: Packaging what I really meant was find an interim solution or whatever it takes to get a logo (assuming you have one you feel happy with) onto your product. Notice how the vast majority of wetshavers even transfer the old packaging's logo when they decant or mill a product into a new container, because they love that stuff. Anyway I've no idea how many old logo-less packs you have to go and what your stock clearance is like etc but I'd be loath to send out any product without some type of logo on it.
@Anthony , RE: soap ingredients - Ummmm I'm 99.9% certain you'll find that if there are 3 items only shown on MdC soaps thats more to do with very loose labeling requirements in France or you having an old puck - as from what I can see they atleast have
six. That said I don't know if I was a soap maker I'd use them as much of an example as they largely seem to get sales on the basis of their previously built rep rather than actually being an actual best in class soap - the wide consensus is they're one of the most overhyped products in wet shaving which is saying something!
You see and again I say this with all due respect but you're talking from YOUR perspective as opposed to an average prospective buyer and I'd say the vast majority of folks who are looking to buy an artisan made soap WILL look at the ingredients list. Leading artisan soapers seem very aware of this and hence a full list plus large print on their labels saying they have kokum butter, shea butter, lanolin etc is very common in leading soaps - so whether these make any difference to the soap is INCONSEQUENTIAL as consumer perception is they're important, thats why they're advertised so prominently. And I'd say that its all but certain that IF incorporated properly into a product they would enhance it's end performance.
The average user here perhaps owns I don't know 3-5 soaps, and generally artisan ones are far rarer due to accessability and cost. So IMHO you've got to objectively look at your product as if you were one of these consumers who are also considering the myriad of other choices and say so why would they choose to go with mine rather than the others?
And RE: folks saying it has to be something new and different - so if someone else is doing it why bother. Sorry but thats absolute simplistic baloney. Firstly, you're basically questioning the logic of ANY product maker who's not got anything UNIQUE to offer as that was a mandatory requirement. There are next to NO UNIQUE products in the entire consumer sphere, let alone Wet Shaving. If it's good it will generally always sell regardless of the number of competitors etc - obviously having a point of difference is handy but thats a given.
So take for example a Bay Rum scent. By the logic others have stated making one is silly as others already do it. Well first you're insulting Anthony in saying he couldn't do one that'd be able to compete. Second, you're basically saying WTF did everyone AFTER the first few makers bother making one for as the market by your logic was 'saturated' with Bay Rum soaps.
Soaps and scents are SO MASSIVELY variable that to imply they're almost commodities and all much of a muchness is madness.
Certain scents are popular, they SELL - thats the key bit you're missing out on - its all fine and good to make a Banana/Menthol/Frangipani scent but is that going to sell. A GOOD Bay Rum based scent will ALWAYS sell and to a much broader sales base than something very niche. As is as a wet shaving soap maker you're marketing to less than 1% of the market, so you really need to maximise the viable sales demographic - atleast for the core of your product line and then have a few more niche scents you perhaps rotate or trial and see how they go.
I'm certainly not advocating just do bog-standard stuff as that will simply never work. Look at someone like Stirling Soaps, who are kind of regarded as the leaders in trying whacky scents. They have a core of classic stuff they stock and stick with, but they rotate all kinds of exotic stuff and if it really works they will add it as a normal line. And that said all the STOCK stuff is their own takes on it so in itself can be very creative and different.
And finally it's all fine and good for folks to say different it good/don't do what everyone else is - but the flaw in this is again shown by the fact that everyone else BASICALLY follows similar lines as IT WORKS. Its a very brave or well financed person who says otherwise and that path is strewn with previous travellers who again thought they knew something that everyone else didn't.
The easiest example if this is there's no grape scented soap on the market at present and by all reports Anthony's one is a very good one - but folks who were advocating do different etc aren't interested in that product now. Simplistic point? Yes, but simply being different is WAY down the list of consumer desireables when choosing a product.
On a sidenote you do realise that we're saving you THOUSANDS in focus group testing.
