[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: re: disclosure of formula

Art wrote:
>>Personally, I don't have a problem with a commercial manufacturer NOT
disclosing the chemical formula that makes up one of their products.  I
understand that a company must try to maintain certain barriers to market
entry in order to succeed.  On such barrier is the secrecy of a proprietary
formula.  For goodness sake, no one is forcing Coca-Cola to disclose its
formula for example. Additionally, I also understand a company's attempt to
brand their products in such a way that casts an aura over the product as
something mystical.  That's just good marketing.  Look at beer commercials
as just one example. Therefore, I do not have a problem with ADA choosing
not to disclose their fertilizer formula. <<

I disagree. there is a big difference between disclosing formulas, method of
production, and the "recipe", and simply disclosing what nutrients it
provides and by what percentage.

I cant speak for Art as to why his business venture with ADA failed, but
from my own marketing background I can only make the following observations:
the market for this hobby in the USA is basically divided into two sections,
the average hobbiest who walks into a store and buys what he thinks will
work at the cheapest price, who has no real idea of how to grow plants, (by
far the majority of retail business) and the more serious person that either
has an educated interest,  or a do it yourself interest. ADA appealed to
neither of these groups. The educated hobbiest didnt buy the mystique, and
the average hobbiest wont spend the money. It doesnt really matter if it
works or not. Tropica isnt really known by the average consumer here,
Seachem on the other hand is...and they are open enough and relatively
inexpensive enough to appeal to people who want the convience and ease of a
commercial product and the confidence to know how and why it works. Thats
good business sense.

Robert Paul H