Thoughts on product line volume

[doanepoole]

A friend of mine who builds guitars mostly but also mandolins, dulcimers, etc. is thinking about paying to get a website designed. We were having a conversation about the advertisement of "standard" models, in respect to the strength and weaknesses of advertising lots of standard models vs. just the basics.

For example, like Martin guitars has tons and tons of "standard" models to choose from (not Standard Series, I think you know what I mean...)

On the other hand, Collings mandolins has 4 standard models to choose from.

Anyway, what do you folks like best as consumers...tons of base models, or just a few.

[jlb]

I think a happy medium is preferable. Having some options is nice, but the Martin line, for example, is almost totally incomprehensible. Their website advertises 224 models, and when one of your models is called JC16-RGTE Premium, somewhere along the line you let your product line get too complicated.

Just my opinion, and nothing against Martins cause I love em!

[mandofiddle]

I'd have a few standard models, and then have upgrade options...

[John Flynn]

It may be that I have a short attention span, but four is about the most number of models I can comprehend from a manufacturer and that is only if each model is clearly deliniated from the others. For some reason though, I like to see a long list of available options.

[pickinNgrinnin]

How about a few base models with custom options to choose from. Wood variations in tops, bracing, inlay on the fretboard/headstock, radiused or flat fretboards, finishes, the like. For example, Weber does a nice job of allowing the consumer to customize the Mandolin IMO.

[PCypert]

I like the Larrivee approach. You know that D, O, L represent body styles. You know that 03 starts the matte finish base model with no appointments. You know the higher the numbers go the fancier the instrument. Typically a 3-5 then a jump to 9 or 10 and 19 indicating special made (usually NAMM or other show type build). Pretty easy to navigate, but also lets you decide what you'd like to pay for. I liked the old Flatiron approach also. Festival, Performer, and Artist. But I do kind of feel like it's kind of negative in conotation. So those that can't afford top of the line aren't Artists? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Paul

[doanepoole]

I hear ya PCypert.

I think the term Artist itself carries a connotation of being poor (i.e. Starving Artist).

I'd imagine most "Artist" model instruments get bought by wealthy collectors/hobbiests!