The monarch and the pipevine swallowtail are the Hermès and Louis Vuitton of the butterfly world – other butterflies imitate them.
Vicery |
Nike shoes are among the most counterfeited products on the
market. The imitations, made in well-equipped factories in Putian, China, are
in many ways indistinguishable from the real thing, and by some estimates one
of every three Nike shoes on the market is a fake.
Products from luxury brands such as Louis Vuitton, Hermès,
and premium watch makers such as Rolex and Panerai are also widely
counterfeited. On the web you can find a large and growing underworld
marketplace for knock off bags, copy pens, replica watches and many other
products that are expertly copied.
I started to observe this global underground marketplace
about a year ago, after this New
York Times Magazine article on fake products. Here are some aspects of it
that puzzle me.
1) Imitations of many luxury brands are priced at about
2% of the genuine article, and the better imitations – some of which even
experts cannot tell apart – are priced at about 5% of the real thing. From a
marketing standpoint, this price differential is a real head scratcher. Why
would the maker of a fake product forego up to 99% of the price the customer is
willing to pay for the real thing? Generic pharma companies, for example, have
learned over the years that it does not make sense to offer generics at 5% of a
formerly patented product’s price, when you can charge 90% of its price and
still capture a significant share of the market. Similarly, grocery stores have
learned to price their private labels just under the umbrella of branded goods.
So why do counterfeiters of luxury goods leave so much money on the table? Why not
capture a greater share of the brand premium? One answer is they face stiff competition
from other counterfeiters. And since their products are indistinguishable from
those of other counterfeiters, price wars spiral out of control, cutting their
margins.
2) Another puzzling aspect of this market is that
unlike other products, prices appear to be cost rather than demand-supply
driven. Take the delicately named “replica” watch market. In this market, the
price for a copy of a $95,000 Patek Philippe is $288, and the price of a fake Swatch
Irony is also $288. If a fake is free-riding on the brand equity, why does it
not capture some of the premium associated with the brand?
3) Price variance, it turns out, is almost entirely
due to the components. Again, in the watch market, a knock-off with a Swiss
movement is priced around $100 more than the same watch with a Chinese-made
movement, regardless of the value of the genuine piece it is knocking off. In
other words, a fake Swiss watch with a genuine Swiss movement costs more than a
fake Swiss watch with a non-Swiss movement. There are also clone movements that
are reverse-engineered Swiss movements made in China, which are priced
somewhere between the fake-fakes, and the real fakes. Price varies as a function
of the components rather than demand for the brand or the original product
being knocked off.
The makers of high quality counterfeit products have the
skills and the ability to make pretty good products at reasonable prices.
What they appear to lack is their own design capabilities and access to
customers who are willing to pay for a product on its own merits rather than on
the basis of the brand. If counterfeiters had their own design capabilities and
customers were able to recognize quality and pay for it without recourse to the
brand, would counterfeiters need to copy? Would they not make better margins
playing in markets where pricing is driven by demand and supply rather than component
costs?
Photo
credits Monarch: Kenneth Dwain Harrelson; Viceroy:
PiccoloNamek
PiccoloNamek
4 comments:
Hello Prof. Niraj,
I was thinking of this price variance (point #1) and it can be simply that if one can spare 10K for a luxury watch/purse/shoes, chances are high that he/she also might nudge it up and go for something that is worth 20K or 30K. More importantly, it is probably not usual for a person who is willing to spare 10K or so on a luxury item to do it knowing it is a replica/fake.
I believe the price point of 5% for a fake luxury item captures exactly the wider segment of consumers with disposable income that matches this price point and aspire owning such item.
I tend to agree with Ahmed. Furthermore I observed that a lot of people buy fake items for the mere thrill of it. I've seen tourists having so much fun buying a fake Rolex and bragging it back home that it only costs him $50. So, for these people, it does not make sense to spend more than what is necessary for the thrill and fun.
There's also the issue of security in buying a real item. You know that you're getting a quality product - and if it proves not to be defective, the company will likely make things right. If I'm (knowingly)buying a knock-off, then a) I would be suspicious of the quality, and b) know that it comes with no warranty.
I also think the generic drug example isn't very helpful. They charge 90% because a) they're regulated to ensure that their product is an exact copy of the original, b) they're themselves reputable companies, and c) sell a product that is a necessity (i.e. why sell it for 10% when the client has no choice but to pay what I charge).
Post a Comment