ABSTRACT
A second disturbing feature of the Australian trade was its dependence on a very limited range of footwear, namely children’s ankle-strap shoes and ladies* slippers. These were at the cheaper end of the firm’s price range and the request that Bell should keep a varied stock was an indication that the question was causing some concern. In 1888 a more determined effort was made, and Gibson & Co. were sent some examples of the latest styles with a request to ‘test the market carefully with them as we should be glad to work up a larger business in boots and shoes as well as ankle straps.’ 4 Later the same month extra discounts were offered on the better class goods to encourage their sale.5 One retail customer in Australia had in fact complained that though he would like to do a trade in better class goods he was never shown any samples. ‘He says’ William wrote to Taylor ‘the same as others, that you people practically offer only the ankle straps and a few other lines in the Melbourne market.’ 6
A third danger was the tendency of merchants to use their own brands on quality footwear. This was probably a response to manufacturers’ branding policies which were emerging powerfully at this time. In 1886, for instance, William had decided to boost the Australian trade by branding, a policy which had proved successful at home, and proposed to Gibson that in future all shoes should be stamped with the Tor mark. ‘We think you will find it a great advan tage’, William wrote, ‘as people get accustomed to it. In this country and especially in Scotland many will buy no boots without it.’ 7 The Australians were quick to see his point and they began to act before the Tor mark could become established. Only a year later William was protesting to Taylor that ‘the change you have now made of having your own stamp on all goods has quite taken from us the benefit of keeping up our name in the market which we looked on as some
compensation for the absence of profit. This puts the whole business on quite a different footing as far as we are concerned/1
By 1890 then, though the merchant trade was accounting for more sales than ever, distinct cracks were appearing in its foundations. The manufacturer was anxious to keep his name, and not the merchant’s, in front of his customers both as a means of widening the range of products and of achieving product differentia tion. On the other side of the merchant barrier customers were becoming irritated by the dominance of the middleman. The merchants needed to do more than merely maintain their sales to conlinue to preserve their positions.
