There's a need to
know your target audience, but COLEBY NICHOLSON believes that strict
definitions might lead you astray, especially when it comes to
jewellery.
I remember one of
the first times I had a discussion about what is and is not jewellery.
In that case, the discussion was about the definition of “fine”
jewellery.
It was around seven
or eight years ago when a leading and high profile Australian supplier
told me that there was too much fashion jewellery in the industry and
retailers were going down market. To her, I made the
following points: trade magazines usually reflect the state of the wider
market and if the market was changing then she needed to accept the
change and adapt, or find herself stranded, supplying product that no
one was buying.
Whether we like the change is irrelevant – it’s going to happen regardless. The
second point was that it was no longer easy to differentiate between
fine and fashion jewellery. There was a time when the two products were
quite different, say 15 years ago.
Back
then, it’s true that traditional jewellery stores rarely stocked
costume jewellery as it was known, and it was actually sold by other
retailers; however, consumers change, and markets and retailers (and
their suppliers) evolve and adapt to meet these changes, which means
product ranges change to accommodate the consumer. Think
about it – there was a time when jewellers once sold china and
porcelain, tableware, glassware and even cutlery. Today, many jewellers
don’t even stock clocks.
The point I was making to my jewellery supplier friend, who had been around long enough to witness how much the market had changed and evolved over the years, was that she didn’t like what she was seeing.
The point I was making to my jewellery supplier friend, who had been around long enough to witness how much the market had changed and evolved over the years, was that she didn’t like what she was seeing.
She wanted the market to stand still and, presumably, for stores to keep buying her high-end diamond jewellery. During
the debate, and to further illustrate just how difficult it is to offer
a clear definition of what is and is not fine jewellery, I gave the
following example – I asked her in what category she would place a
stainless steel ring. She said she would class it as a fashion piece
because it was not made from a precious metal.
“Cool”, I said, “but what if we set a diamond into the stainless steel ring? How do you describe it now – fashion jewellery or fine jewellery?” She answered with a question: “How big is the diamond?”
After further discussion, she said if the diamond was 30 points or less, it was still fashion jewellery, but if the diamond was larger, it could be described as fine jewellery.
I’m positive there are jewellers reading this who will disagree, which just highlights the problem. These days I don’t think you can differentiate between the two. More importantly, I have never understood why we need to be concerned about defining and differentiating between the two anyway, especially if consumers don’t make the distinction.
“Cool”, I said, “but what if we set a diamond into the stainless steel ring? How do you describe it now – fashion jewellery or fine jewellery?” She answered with a question: “How big is the diamond?”
After further discussion, she said if the diamond was 30 points or less, it was still fashion jewellery, but if the diamond was larger, it could be described as fine jewellery.
I’m positive there are jewellers reading this who will disagree, which just highlights the problem. These days I don’t think you can differentiate between the two. More importantly, I have never understood why we need to be concerned about defining and differentiating between the two anyway, especially if consumers don’t make the distinction.
Consumers
are simply shopping for jewellery at a range of different price points
and various styles, and yet I still come across people who believe there
is a need to have two classes of jewellery even though no one can
define them. In some cases, it’s a topic that can even incite extreme
passion and rage. Since that first debate seven years
ago, the industry has continued to evolve. Branded jewellery has taken a
much stronger foothold and has become very important to many retailers,
and yet most branded ranges would be correctly described as fashion
jewellery.
In line with the brand explosion, product lines have widened to include a vast array of items that defy the traditional definitions of fine or fashion jewellery. Think of USB necklaces, jewelled headphones and fragrance jewellery. Should these products even be called jewellery?
In line with the brand explosion, product lines have widened to include a vast array of items that defy the traditional definitions of fine or fashion jewellery. Think of USB necklaces, jewelled headphones and fragrance jewellery. Should these products even be called jewellery?
In this
case, maybe the answer is simple: if the primary purpose of the product
is not adornment then it is not jewellery at all. For example, the
primary purpose of a USB necklace is for storing data; adornment is
secondary. The primary purpose of fragrance jewellery is clearly about
scent. Then again, does it even matter?
I do
know what does matter, and that’s accepting change and adapting to it.
Many years later one might ask, what happened to that fine jewellery
supplier who seemed more concerned about definitions rather than
delivering what the customer wants?
Well,
her business still exists; however, as a once strong industry leader
it’s now a shade of its former glory and it would not surpise me if it
wasn't here in two years time. Sad, but true!
No comments:
Post a Comment