Archibald London: true craftsmanship, no middlemen, Official Vendor Thread

[CWV]

We'll be going with Hamerli - thanks

If you want someone to compare them with the old ones, I’m available :3

 

[JohnMRobie]

We'll be going with Hamerli - thanks

*hits refresh button on the page to try and see if they’ll be peccary or calf*

 

[ArchibaldRoh]

*hits refresh button on the page to try and see if they’ll be peccary or calf*

I believe we are doing a range in calf and the peccery as a collab piece with Hammerli.

 

[JohnMRobie]

I believe we are doing a range in calf and the peccery as a collab piece with Hammerli.

Something to look forward to. Guess I know what my next AoL purchase will be whenever they become available.

 

[shirtingfantasy]

?

would it affect the sustainability of those shoes?

 

[Cheshire symposium]

?

would it affect the sustainability of those shoes?

Got to say that I am a little perplexed by the note put out by Rohan last night. In effect, they have massively underpriced the ‘normal’ price of their products and they are going to significantly increase them soon. So please sign up to the ‘naked’ campaign to get the best value. Oh, forgot to mention, that they have also historically mispriced the naked cost as well, so that will also be going up.
My sense is that this brand/company are in a bit of trouble and are scrambling around to find something that clicks. No shame in that, but this change certainly hasn’t enticed me back to purchase there.

 

[ArchibaldRoh]

Got to say that I am a little perplexed by the note put out by Rohan last night. In effect, they have massively underpriced the ‘normal’ price of their products and they are going to significantly increase them soon. So please sign up to the ‘naked’ campaign to get the best value. Oh, forgot to mention, that they have also historically mispriced the naked cost as well, so that will also be going up.
My sense is that this brand/company are n a bit of trouble and are scrambling around to find something that clicks. No shame in that, but this change certainly hasn’t enticed me back to purchase there.

Naked remains more or less the same, it was fixed from the underpricing issue last year. The Naked price can go up and down through each review.

We implemented the campaign in 2019 within a week of the idea and thus a lot was rushed and did not have the relevant systems built to manage such a quick change and hence the then manual calculation and input of pricing in 12 different currencies across a lot of products was not done correctly by the single person in charge of it. To be fair it was a huge task, we had a week and it was totally open to error. This led to the issue of many prices set to a significant amount below actual cost. Through 2021 when we did a deep audit of everything following the incident with the HW shoes, we identified this issue and fixed it.

A lot has changed for the better since then.

The full price is the major change but that doesn't really affect anyone but new converts to the brand who choose against taking membership. At the end of the day Naked prices are priced far below the current full price and by raising the full price all that is occurring is the gap between the two increases.
The membership isn't expensive so even if a person is looking at a single item like a sneaker, by taking the Taste membership and purchasing the sneaker they still come out of it paying less than they would at today's full price. On top of that they have the remaining balance to purchase anything (should they want) at the Naked prices until the membership expires.

The move is designed to place a greater emphasis on the idea of Naked and membership but also ultimately by pricing closer to the items worth we aren't doing anything wrong I would say. It will still be a fairer price as we understand we aren't wholesaling these items but if a person wants it without the plan then they can decide for themselves if they think it is worth it. Effectively there is little merit in being direct-to-consumer AND having a membership option, it was time to choose one of the two and the latter is more disruptive, more unique, and also effectively helps create a community of people who buy into the project and reap returns. Direct-to-consumer luxe doesn't work easily because it abandons a key signifier of value to the luxury shopper - price.

The increase in full price expresses the true value of the item more than it did before.
The membership option offers a more disruptive price point than we had before.

Most purchases these days are done via a membership,I guess this is now picking an approach to focus on whilst solving the inevitable price problem that has always plagued our brand.

Thank you for your previous custom and I do understand your decision.

 

[josepidal]

Has anyone else experienced long delays of product shipment? I ordered the shell cordovan Goodyear sneaker back in April with original estimated delivery date of May/June.

Have a friend in Asia who ordered one of every color of shell cordovan mids, plus the white veg tan sneakers. Got them eventually in a gigantic box that showed up on his doorstep. Communication is good and be figured you have to make allowances for a startup company at a time when even the likes of Apple have supply chain problems.

 

[josepidal]

Has anyone purchased the Archibald polos and can compare against other brands? I have a friend who bought and really liked the t-shirts, but not the polos.

 

[Rewiag]

Has anyone purchased the Archibald polos and can compare against other brands? I have a friend who bought and really liked the t-shirts, but not the polos.

Just got my Classic Polo shirts in grey and white

The fabric is super nice. Comparing to Lacoste or Ralph Lauren it is much softer and lighter, definitely has a more luxurious feel to it! The construction is well done, it has a well fitting collar and nice button holes. One thing that is missing for perfection is MOP buttons with shanks. The fit is relaxed, but in a good way: both the collar and the armhole fits nicely, body has a regular fit, length is a bit on the longer side.

This is a great polo overall, much better than the industry standard Lacoste or RL

 

[Porker]

@ArchibaldRoh I have supported you previously and will continue to support you after the most recent strategic shift. I also think that the membership option and naked represent good value for my personal situation.

However I strongly dissagree with this sentiment

Direct-to-consumer luxe doesn't work easily because it abandons a key signifier of value to the luxury shopper - price.

I don't believe that people who buy luxury goods on high mark ups do so on some sort of cost plus value proposition. A large part of the ulility of the purchase comes from buying the brand. Something that is very difficult and costly to establish, but also maintain. Brands serve as an economic MOAT to disrupters such as yourselves. Only a small portion of a brands pull comes from high prices alone.

I don't think you've created a Veblen good, where increasing prices alone will increase demand. To me the failure of "Direct-to-consumer luxe" is that the luxe which supports those margins isn't solely about the quality of the product.

I make no judgements on what people value, be that materials and workmanship, branding or anything else. Consumers are free to make their own choice.

With that said. I think it's a smart move to increases your normal prices to anchor customers and, as you've alluded to, drive them towards memberships.

The previous regular prices may have been too low, and there might not have been enough contingency in the margins. The higher prices in combination with memberships may prove to be a winner, and I hope it's successful for you.

However I think it's a little insulting to customers, and an oversite in your self evaluation - something that, to you're credit, you are very open and honest about - to put the failure of the previous pricing model down the prices being too low for customers to realise the quality of the products.

 

[ArchibaldRoh]

@ArchibaldRoh I have supported you previously and will continue to support you after the most recent strategic shift. I also think that the membership option and naked represent good value for my personal situation.

However I strongly dissagree with this sentiment


I don't believe that people who buy luxury goods on high mark ups do so on some sort of cost plus value proposition. A large part of the ulility of the purchase comes from buying the brand. Something that is very difficult and costly to establish, but also maintain. Brands serve as an economic MOAT to disrupters such are yourselves. Only a small portion of a brands pull comes from high prices alone.

I don't think you've created a Veblen good, where increasing prices alone will increase demand. To me the failure of "Direct-to-consumer luxe" is that the luxe which supports those margins isn't solely about the quality of the product.

I make no judgements on what people value, be that materials and workmanship, branding or anything else. Consumers are free to make their own choice.

With that said. I think it's a smart move to increases your normal prices to anchor customers and, as you've alluded to, drive them towards memberships.

The previous regular prices may have been too low, and there might not have been enough contingency in the margins. The higher prices in combination with memberships maybe prove to be a winner, and I hope it's sucessfull for you. However I think it's a little insulting to customers, and an oversite in your self evaluation - something that, to you're credit, you are very open and honest about - to put the failure of the previous pricing model down the prices being too low for customers to realise the quality of the products.

Thank you for those thoughts, I do very much appreciate you taking the time to explain them and definitely agree with all the very relevant points you have raised. I will keep them in mind.

With regards to the excerpt in question, I think I was referring more to the effect price has on general hypothetical new customers/potential customers rather than existing converts. The existing customers who gave Archibald a chance - the early adopters if you will - are part of the minority and I think have displayed a deeper understanding (and perhaps, appreciation in hopefully most cases) of what we were trying to do. It is something I am very grateful for and ultimately what fueled the email as I wanted to explain precisely what is the rationale behind this next move as I feel I owe it to all of you who did allow (or provide a chance for) the current model to function.

Most customers that have joined our journey to date represent a group of people who have taken the time to first understand what we are up to and subsequently decide to be positive, give us a chance and try the product despite the disparity that exists in price points in conventional retail. It seems to be a consistent narrative. I have had the privilege of conversing with many customers over the WhatsApp channel and to use a description I use internally, I am often surprised at how their "awareness state" is higher than the average shopper.

Success in bringing people outside of this into our world requires a lot of customer education for them to reach the point. It could be/have been one of many things including the fact that in some ways our approach to customer education was something we never quite cracked. It could perhaps also have been that educating a customer is extremely expensive and something we were rarely able to see right through or even a case of the cold and rational arguments being made about middlemen and markups just weren't what anyone wanted to hear on a luxury purchase which for many is ultimately emotionally fueled. And this emotion was not going to easily be replaced through cold and rational arguments.

I do think there is still some way to go to think this out fully and have deliberated it quite a bit over the past months. I know there are oversights, there always are but it is the ability to have conversations like this that help shed light onto some of them. Thank you.

 

[Porker]

Thank you for those thoughts, I do very much appreciate you taking the time to explain them and definitely agree with all the very relevant points you have raised. I will keep them in mind.

With regards to the excerpt in question, I think I was referring more to the effect price has on general hypothetical new customers/potential customers rather than existing converts. The existing customers who gave Archibald a chance - the early adopters if you will - are part of the minority and I think have displayed a deeper understanding (and perhaps, appreciation in hopefully most cases) of what we were trying to do. It is something I am very grateful for and ultimately what fueled the email as I wanted to explain precisely what is the rationale behind this next move as I feel I owe it to all of you who did allow (or provide a chance for) the current model to function.

Most customers that have joined our journey to date represent a group of people who have taken the time to first understand what we are up to and subsequently decide to be positive, give us a chance and try the product despite the disparity that exists in price points in conventional retail. It seems to be a consistent narrative. I have had the privilege of conversing with many customers over the WhatsApp channel and to use a description I use internally, I am often surprised at how their "awareness state" is higher than the average shopper.

Success in bringing people outside of this into our world requires a lot of customer education for them to reach the point. It could be/have been one of many things including the fact that in some ways our approach to customer education was something we never quite cracked. It could perhaps also have been that educating a customer is extremely expensive and something we were rarely able to see right through or even a case of the cold and rational arguments being made about middlemen and markups just weren't what anyone wanted to hear on a luxury purchase which for many is ultimately emotionally fueled. And this emotion was not going to easily be replaced through cold and rational arguments.

I do think there is still some way to go to think this out fully and have deliberated it quite a bit over the past months. I know there are oversights, there always are but it is the ability to have conversations like this that help shed light onto some of them. Thank you.

As always, a very receptive response and one which takes what some might have seen as negative comments as constructive thoughts. Especially on a topic that must be very personal to you, and one you've thought about a lot more than me.

I do think there's a niche of customer (probably me) who enjoys buying quality items at a good price and will take the time to be educated. As you said in your reply, and in your website post educating large amounts of people is very tough. Moreso when you're primarily based online.

I think the popularity of discount outlets selling lower quallity direct to outlet items, who are in someways a competitor of yours, show are large number of customers shopping in your price bracket do so for reasons other purely rational product quality vs. price.

Part of me dislikes the idea of marketing. It's an inefficiency, it increases costs and the best products don't always have the best marketing. But it's a necessary evil of having consumer choice/education. It can also have benefits. I'd rather people get genuine happiness, above that quality of the product, from buying luxury goods rather than increasing their spend on unenvironmntally friendly fast fashion.

I totally agree about the emotional aspects of purchasing. I build recommender systems, and do a lot of work on the psychology of choice. I've implemented pyshcological pricing strategies with great succcess, and I'd recommend a book called "The myth of fair value" if you haven't already read it. But I don't think I've seen a realtively unknown product increase the units sold by raising the price as it's sole strategy.

 

[ArchibaldRoh]

I totally agree about the emotional aspects of purchasing. I build recommender systems, and do a lot of work on the psychology of choice. I've implemented pyshcological pricing strategies with great succcess, and I'd recommend a book called "The myth of fair value" if you haven't already read it. But I don't think I've seen a realtively unknown product increase the units sold by raising the price as it's sole strategy.

My apologies for taking some time to respond.

I totally agree across the board.

Thank you so much for the recommendation, I will order it today. Can I just confirm it is the one by William Poundstone?

I believe the change in full price will be only the first step. I was actually discussing the same with another kind Styleforum member yesterday evening at length over Whatsapp. At the end of the day, it is ultimately about optimizing the value perceived by someone clicking in for the first time (be it through an advertisement or organically finding the brand, etc). The change in price is not intended to increase sales at full price but I think more so to help define a more appropriate value to the product or provide a first step of doing so.

At present, the membership communication is quite raw and it requires a lot of polishing as I am already seeing people emailing in questions expressing their hesitation for reasons which, once explained, they seem more than happy to continue. It all came to me during a conclusion that we were perhaps saying we were too many different things and trying to make too many different versions of Archibald exist together. With the increases in the full price, the difference between the Naked pricing and full price increases substantially, but more so, it also allows us to break away from the direct-to-consumer narrative. I think that really has done more harm than good over the years, however, at the same time, I don't really have the data to prove but rather have to rely on primary interactions with customers whenever I am fortunate to have them.

This move is actually something that was suggested to me years ago by one of our eyewear customers back in 2016 when we were Archibald Optics and sold only eyewear. I had sent an email to our database explaining the challenges of Archibald something I tend to be keen to do as I am very interested in understanding the psychology, learnings, and perceptions of the early/organic adopters in a bid to gain their valuable perspective and ensure we are building a brand in a direction that coincides with what made them originally choose Archibald. I have tried to find the email but haven't been able to locate it but from memory, it was an example of a jewelry store in their town that wasn't doing so well but one day they increased the prices of what they were selling (doubled them) and things started changing. Once again, I agree it's not always that simple and especially in our case, it is going to mean a series of correct steps and ensuring that things are communicated succinctly and effectively (amongst other things such as better service, more in-demand items, etc).

Another thing I haven't mentioned very much is the aversion of some incredible makers to make items for us due to our previous business model. This will help, in some ways, to alleviate their fears as the sticker price on the item will be closer to what they want it to be. At the same time, the disruption and core values of Archibald from a value perspective can come through the membership, and hopefully, that will make these craftsmen/collaborators more inclined.

Finally, the brand has a very defined purpose, something I have to be honest that I struggled to pinpoint or explain in a clear manner until it came to me very recently.

"To allow more people to access and enjoy less of better."

I appreciate that to many this might sound like fluff but it is ultimately the simplest communication of what I genuinely have set out to do. And what I have realized is as long as that purpose is linked to every action we take then eventually we will be able to define Archibald and the brand values in the right way.

For a long time, and again a fault of my own, I made the mistake of leading all communication we had with what we do and how we do it rather than focusing on the ultimate net effect we are trying to have as a company. So even in evaluating this decision, I checked back with this purpose and it seemed to align as ultimately this makes membership the disruptive element within Archibald and allows the full price to communicate value in a more standardized way rather than speaking of middlemen and mark-ups.

Membership is a model that is different, easier to communicate, offers better value, should theoretically lower the acquisition cost into Archibald, allows the cultivation of a true community all of which fits the above purpose quite well.

I guess the challenge now is deciding how prominent should membership be within the framework of Archibald. That is a significant challenge.

Thanks again for taking the time to engage and share your views. It is all tremendously helpful and I am very grateful.

 

[Porker]

My apologies for taking some time to respond.

I totally agree across the board.

Thank you so much for the recommendation, I will order it today. Can I just confirm it is the one by William Poundstone?

I believe the change in full price will be only the first step. I was actually discussing the same with another kind Styleforum member yesterday evening at length over Whatsapp. At the end of the day, it is ultimately about optimizing the value perceived by someone clicking in for the first time (be it through an advertisement or organically finding the brand, etc). The change in price is not intended to increase sales at full price but I think more so to help define a more appropriate value to the product or provide a first step of doing so.

At present, the membership communication is quite raw and it requires a lot of polishing as I am already seeing people emailing in questions expressing their hesitation for reasons which, once explained, they seem more than happy to continue. It all came to me during a conclusion that we were perhaps saying we were too many different things and trying to make too many different versions of Archibald exist together. With the increases in the full price, the difference between the Naked pricing and full price increases substantially, but more so, it also allows us to break away from the direct-to-consumer narrative. I think that really has done more harm than good over the years, however, at the same time, I don't really have the data to prove but rather have to rely on primary interactions with customers whenever I am fortunate to have them.

This move is actually something that was suggested to me years ago by one of our eyewear customers back in 2016 when we were Archibald Optics and sold only eyewear. I had sent an email to our database explaining the challenges of Archibald something I tend to be keen to do as I am very interested in understanding the psychology, learnings, and perceptions of the early/organic adopters in a bid to gain their valuable perspective and ensure we are building a brand in a direction that coincides with what made them originally choose Archibald. I have tried to find the email but haven't been able to locate it but from memory, it was an example of a jewelry store in their town that wasn't doing so well but one day they increased the prices of what they were selling (doubled them) and things started changing. Once again, I agree it's not always that simple and especially in our case, it is going to mean a series of correct steps and ensuring that things are communicated succinctly and effectively (amongst other things such as better service, more in-demand items, etc).

Another thing I haven't mentioned very much is the aversion of some incredible makers to make items for us due to our previous business model. This will help, in some ways, to alleviate their fears as the sticker price on the item will be closer to what they want it to be. At the same time, the disruption and core values of Archibald from a value perspective can come through the membership, and hopefully, that will make these craftsmen/collaborators more inclined.

Finally, the brand has a very defined purpose, something I have to be honest that I struggled to pinpoint or explain in a clear manner until it came to me very recently.

"To allow more people to access and enjoy less of better."

I appreciate that to many this might sound like fluff but it is ultimately the simplest communication of what I genuinely have set out to do. And what I have realized is as long as that purpose is linked to every action we take then eventually we will be able to define Archibald and the brand values in the right way.

For a long time, and again a fault of my own, I made the mistake of leading all communication we had with what we do and how we do it rather than focusing on the ultimate net effect we are trying to have as a company. So even in evaluating this decision, I checked back with this purpose and it seemed to align as ultimately this makes membership the disruptive element within Archibald and allows the full price to communicate value in a more standardized way rather than speaking of middlemen and mark-ups.

Membership is a model that is different, easier to communicate, offers better value, should theoretically lower the acquisition cost into Archibald, allows the cultivation of a true community all of which fits the above purpose quite well.

I guess the challenge now is deciding how prominent should membership be within the framework of Archibald. That is a significant challenge.

Thanks again for taking the time to engage and share your views. It is all tremendously helpful and I am very grateful.

No worries at all, I'm amazed you find as much time to engage as you do.

Yehp, that's correct. It's by William Poundstone.

In my, uneducated, opinion. I think it's a good direction for you to take. I hope to be able to continue to follow you on what turns out to be a long and successful journey. It sounds like you've found what I'd call (as cheesy as it sounds) your north star. Something to keep you on track, and all your decision will cascade down from there.

I don't know where you are as a company. But the recurring revenue and owned, rather than purchased, audience that membership will bring will make you much more attractive to investors if that's an option you wanted open to you in the future.