Gillette Company History Geek Out

[mblakele]

This morning I ran across a 1916 article by Thomas W. Pelham in Advertising and Selling dated May 1916. I think it belongs in this thread. It is labeled as an "interview", but it reads more like an article. As most of us probably know, Pelham was a lawyer and an important person in the company, running both sales and marketing. In this article Pelham touches on the early history of safety razors, naturally to explain what sort of advertising and selling the Gillette razor required. Click through for the full view in google books.



Reading through it I spotted at least one typo: "after the formation of the company (in 1904)" should probably be "in 1901" when the company was first formed, or perhaps 1902 when it was renamed after Gillette. Of course Pelham himself first used a Gillette razor in 1903, according to McKibben - that is another story I would like to hear in more detail. Anyway there is no mention of the early ads in System in October-November 1903, nor anything about 1903 at all. Instead he begins with 1904 and 'automatic signs that that went through the motions of shaving – even illustration the "angle stroke".' I think that would be the Gillette Slide, and I would love to see one of those signs in action.

Pelham mentions the 1907 decision to open a factory in England, but adds no details to what we already know. Significantly he talks about "branches in all the European countries" and global "reach", but only mentions a factory in England. Interestingly he does not mention closing the factory in England (Leicester), which we think happened in January 1916. Likely the article was written a few weeks before publication, but probably not months prior. More likely he did not think it was relevant to his story.

Pelham also says that advertising for all countries was coordinated in Boston. I wonder about that: usually local perspective is essential for effective advertising, and ads like http://mr-razor.com/Werbung/C 1912 Combination Set French.jpg look to me like local products. But perhaps Pelham simplified a more complex process.

Pelham reveals that "by far the greater volume of business" goes through jobbers: wholesale buyers who then distribute to retailers. But they also continued to sell directly to retailers and directly to consumers. Finally he mentions increased demand due to the war, 80% higher than 1915, and hints that demand is outstripping supply.

At the top of this article Pelham is described as "President". But I had thought King Camp Gillette was company president at the time, albeit mostly in an honorary role. Looking at the 1916 Poor's Manual of Industrials, vol. 7, p513 I see King Camp as President, Joyce as Vice-President, and no officer role for Pelham. But that would refer to 1915, and I cannot find a reference for 1916. Or it might be an error that crept into the article.

1916 was before the government contract, correct? Anyone know exactly when that began?

Also I see that 1916 was the year John J. Joyce retired as chairman, and John E. Aldred took over. I think Joyce died in January 1917, but does anyone know exactly when he retired? It may not matter much: Pelham and Fahey seemed to run the show.

 

[alex2363]

This morning I ran across a 1916 article by Thomas W. Pelham in Advertising and Selling dated May 1916. I think it belongs in this thread. It is labeled as an "interview", but it reads more like an article. As most of us probably know, Pelham was a lawyer and an important person in the company, running both sales and marketing. In this article Pelham touches on the early history of safety razors, naturally to explain what sort of advertising and selling the Gillette razor required. Click through for the full view in google books.

Reading through it I spotted at least one typo: "after the formation of the company (in 1904)" should probably be "in 1901" when the company was first formed, or perhaps 1902 when it was renamed after Gillette. Of course Pelham himself first used a Gillette razor in 1903, according to McKibben - that is another story I would like to hear in more detail.

Pelham was a straight razor shaver all his life. But in 1903 Perry Hunt showed the razor to Pelham and he was insantly converted. Pelham said that it cut his shave time from 25 minutes to just 5 minutes. He then proceeded to draw up the legal matters that formed the Townsend and Hunt group known as the Gillette selling agency. Peham also signed on as Gillette's sales director- [Gillette sales Agency Vice Pres] and legal counsel.

Anyway there is no mention of the early ads in System in October-November 1903, nor anything about 1903 at all. Instead he begins with 1904 and 'automatic signs that that went through the motions of shaving – even illustration the "angle stroke".' I think that would be the Gillette Slide, and I would love to see one of those signs in action.

i would too......

Pelham mentions the 1907 decision to open a factory in England, but adds no details to what we already know. Significantly he talks about "branches in all the European countries" and global "reach", but only mentions a factory in England. Interestingly he does not mention closing the factory in England (Leicester), which we think happened in January 1916. Likely the article was written a few weeks before publication, but probably not months prior. More likely he did not think it was relevant to his story.

Well, this article seems like a quick or short answers type of post. There probably was not enough space or the editors probably edited stuff out to make it fit for the allocated space. The English factory was not talked much about, most likely due to Gillette's lengthy issues that pertained to the working of the patent for the French factory that had a deadline to meet.

Pelham also says that advertising for all countries was coordinated in Boston. I wonder about that: usually local perspective is essential for effective advertising, and ads like http://mr-razor.com/Werbung/C 1912 Combination Set French.jpg look to me like local products. But perhaps Pelham simplified a more complex process.

I think they used ingenious marketing and just made up ads that looked like they were printed in that particular place. I remember seeing one for a Double Ring from France. We all know that France did not produce razors, especially a 1904 DD. Gillette didnt have any foreign factories back then.

Pelham reveals that "by far the greater volume of business" goes through jobbers: wholesale buyers who then distribute to retailers. But they also continued to sell directly to retailers and directly to consumers. Finally he mentions increased demand due to the war, 80% higher than 1915, and hints that demand is outstripping supply.

This 80% higher sales increase was due to Nickersons improving of the automatic blade honing machine that made more blades and the advent of 2 new successful razor models, the Bulldog and Milady Decollete.

At the top of this article Pelham is described as "President". But I had thought King Camp Gillette was company president at the time, albeit mostly in an honorary role. Looking at the 1916 Poor's Manual of Industrials, vol. 7, p513 I see King Camp as President, Joyce as Vice-President, and no officer role for Pelham. But that would refer to 1915, and I cannot find a reference for 1916. Or it might be an error that crept into the article.

Frank Fahey/treasure , Pelham sales director were the 2 front runners. the 3rd John Joyce/major investor was too sick to manage, he died 1917 and his controlling shares were sold to John Aldred.

1916 was before the government contract, correct? Anyone know exactly when that began?

1914-18

Also I see that 1916 was the year John J. Joyce retired as chairman, and John E. Aldred took over. I think Joyce died in January 1917, but does anyone know exactly when he retired? It may not matter much: Pelham and Fahey seemed to run the show.

He did not manage much, he was in declining health in 1916. Joyce was 68 in fall of 1916, he died in Jan 26 1917.

 

[MacDaddy]

This morning I ran across a 1916 article by Thomas W. Pelham in Advertising and Selling dated May 1916.

Nice find there. On the whole title question, I wonder if Pelham was speaking with them under the auspices of being President of the Gillette Sales Company and the magazine just misattributed him. There are still mentions of the Gillette Sales Company up to and after this point, even though it had been brought back into the parent organization. It would also make a lot more sense for Pelham to be speaking to the magazine, Advertising and Selling, under that context I would think. That could also account for the date discrepancy -- he may have been talking specifically about the foundation of the sales company there rather than the manufacturing company.

One other thought: I wonder if the bit that you're taking to be an indication that demand may be outstripping supply was actually him hinting at the closure of the Leicester plant. What he says specifically is, "the factory is now in a position where further orders raise a question of supply," which certainly implies your take given the context (included fully below), but you could also read the emphasis onto the "position of the factory" instead. He might have really been saying that they had enough sets warehoused for the short term, but knowing that they'd be closing the plant entirely because of the war that they weren't sure whether they'd be able to continue to supply future orders, which of course he would never want to come out and say plainly.

This 80% higher sales increase was due to Nickersons improving of the automatic blade honing machine that made more blades and the advent of 2 new successful razor models, the Bulldog and Milady Decollete.

What Pelham is specifically talking about here is the increase in sales comparing the first quarter of 1916 with the first quarter of 1915, partly attributable to the demand that seems to be coming from nations already involved in WWI at this time. Here's the pertinent quote from the article for folks who aren't able to access Google Books:

Owing to the war, the market abroad has received special attention during the past twenty months. Many of the belligerent countries have been supplying the soldiers at the front with safety razors of various kinds, Russia, particularly, having called for many shipments, for Russia, "the bearded nation," is now, significantly enough, joining the ranks of the smooth shaven.

Partly because of this, Gillette sales for the first three months of 1916 have exceeded the sales for the same length of time for 1915 by about 80 percent, and the factory is now in a position where further orders raise a question of supply.
​

1916 was before the government contract, correct? Anyone know exactly when that began?

1914-18

Those are the years of the full run of WWI, Alex. The United States didn't declare war until April of 1917, and while we know that they were making Service Sets and the like prior to that and Navy enlistment would have certainly been up to support the shipping lanes to Great Britain, I doubt that the Army contract would have been struck prior to the country's declaration of war. My guess is that the contract would probably have been more closely associated with the beginning of the draft, with the Selective Service Act of 1917, but that's more or less just me taking a minimally educated guess.

 

[mblakele]

Thanks, gents. I had thought the sales company was wound up before 1910, but looking more closely I see a few mentions dated as late as 1918: for example http://books.google.com/books?id=ippCAQAAIAAJ&pg=RA18-PA38 in Editor & Publisher, Volume 51, dated 1918-12-07 p38. So reporter confusion is the simplest explanation, I agree.

On the WWI government contract, I found one mention in the September 1918 Blade, with Fahey mentioning "last January when the government business came upon us": I am not 100% sure if he meant January 1917 or 1918, but from our other evidence I assume 1917. He also mentions a pre-wartime production rate of 4000 razors daily, which would work out to almost 1.5M at 365-day production. But 1M is more likely, if they took off weekends and holidays. That fits with the 1917 figure of 1.1M razors sold. But wartime production took that to 20,000 razors daily at the time of publication: 5M at 250 working days per year. Confirming that Fahey mentions delivering 2.5M razors in the preceding six months.



Around the same time Pelham talked to another journalist about advertising and general business outlook. The result was this article in United States Investor, Volume 29, Part 1, Issues 1-26, 1918-03-02 p16b.



This time Pelham mentions 1930. "The first advertisement of the Gillette Safety Razor was placed in 1903 and cost $100. It brought in 187 $5 bills through the mail." Note that he does not mention delivery of any razors, continuing the mystery around the earliest manufacturing dates for production razors. "In January 1904, 175 razors were sold; the next month 1,500; the third month 1,800; the 12th month 19,000; the 24th month 52,000." This does not match data from Nickerson in the Blade, which was 1276, 1255, and 1595 for the first three months and an average of 14,500 sets in each month of Q4. But Nickerson reported production numbers while Pelham reported sales. With that understanding, both are probably correct.

The author of the article goes on to talk about patents and pricing. "We have pointed out from time to time the very apparent fact that practically all of the Gillette Company's assets are in their patents and good will. As the patents expire within a few years it is obvious that the large earnings of the company are almost entirely dependent on printer's ink and the ability of its advertising staff to keep the name of Gillette before the public. It seems probable that the removal of the patent protection which the company now enjoys is going to make a great difference in its business since even the American public is not going to continue indefinitely to pay a monopoly price of $5 a and $1 a dozen for blades...."

Listening closely you can hear the footsteps of the next generation: New Improved razors at $5 for some, and Old Type sets at $1 for everyone else.

 

[DrAwkward]

Time to dive back into discussions about Gillette history.

There is a thread about a 7 O'Clock variant that has raised questions concerning Gillette's takeover of 7 O'Clock.

http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php/381671-New-7-O-clock-English-NEW-Variant-Short-Comb

Pictures of two 7 O'Clock SC razors in the thread show interesting differences. For example, one has 11 teeth and the other one has 12 (not counting the corner teeth). The cap and baseplate designs are also slightly different. I would explain further, but the details are all in the thread.

I'm hoping some of you history experts will have some insights.

 

[mblakele]

Looking at Google Books, references to 7 O'Clock start ca. 1916 with a Valet-like stropped safety razor. Here is one from 1920:



My guess is the company started up before WWI, and managed to stay alive through the war. By 1938 they were part of Gillette, probably a good bit earlier. And... that was about all I could find. But I look forward to learning more.

 

[MacDaddy]

The Auto Strop Safety Razor Company, Ltd. is listed as the owner of the "7 o'clock" trademark with a first use date of Feb. 13, 1913, in this registration with the USPTO:

Word Mark	7 O'CLOCK
Goods and Services	(EXPIRED) IC 008. US 023. G & S: SAFETY-RAZORS AND SAFETY-RAZOR BLADES. FIRST USE: 19130213. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19130213
Mark Drawing Code	(5) WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED FORM
Serial Number	71078296
Filing Date	May 15, 1914
Current Basis	1A;44E
Original Filing Basis	1A;44E
Registration Number	0099931
Registration Date	September 29, 1914
Owner	(REGISTRANT) AUTO STROP SAFETY RAZOR CO., LD. COMPANY ENGLAND 61 NEW OXFORD STREET LONDON ENGLAND
Priority Date	February 13, 1913
Type of Mark	TRADEMARK
Register	PRINCIPAL
Renewal	3RD RENEWAL 19740929
Live/Dead Indicator	DEAD

It was last renewed in 1974 and expired in 1995 according to what I can find. From that, I would assume that the brand came into Gillette's fold with the Auto-Strop merger. In any case it was certainly being handled as part of Gillette's account by 1931, when this snippet from Newspaper World is from:



And this second from 1933:

 

[DrAwkward]

Thanks, Porter and mblakele. IIRC, the merger was in 1930. So, maybe Jeff's 7 O'Clock English SC was made by Auto Strop in or about 1930, then Gillette modified the design (eliminating one tooth and whatnot). I'm thinking the Auto Strop version may actually have been the inspiration for Gillette 7 O'Clock version, but also for the various UK NEW LCs that use a similar baseplate (e.g., the #77/#88, Richwood, the NEW raised flat bottom, etc.). The main difference is that all of those Gillette NEW razors have 11 teeth (not including corners), while Jeff's (Auto Strop?) razor has 12.

 

[MacDaddy]

Obviously it's impossible to say definitively, but I doubt that the design came through that route, mostly because it seems far more likely that if Auto-Strop were creating double-edged razors under the 7 O'Clock brand they would have been much more similar to the Probak than to any Gillette. And the fully grooved guard plate is much more "Gillette" than "Probak."

If I were guessing I'd say that whole family of design might possibly have come from the Roth-Büchner side of the house. The similarity to the Rotbart/Mond Extra razor is obvious, but it's also pretty easy to see that design not so much as a riff on the short-comb NEW, but rather as a retrofitting of Rotbart's older Single Ring clone (like my example below, which also has 12 inner teeth in the comb, by the way) to be able to accept the central groove in the guard plate. Of course, from there it's just as easy to see it as an extension of Gillette's own Single Ring, too. So...

 

[DrAwkward]

Obviously it's impossible to say definitively, but I doubt that the design came through that route, mostly because it seems far more likely that if Auto-Strop were creating double-edged razors under the 7 O'Clock brand they would have been much more similar to the Probak than to any Gillette. And the fully grooved guard plate is much more "Gillette" than "Probak."

If I were guessing I'd say that whole family of design might possibly have come from the Roth-Büchner side of the house. The similarity to the Rotbart/Mond Extra razor is obvious, but it's also pretty easy to see that design not so much as a riff on the short-comb NEW, but rather as a retrofitting of Rotbart's older Single Ring clone (like my example below, which also has 12 inner teeth in the comb, by the way) to be able to accept the central groove in the guard plate. Of course, from there it's just as easy to see it as an extension of Gillette's own Single Ring, too. So...

Certainly, the 7 O'Clock SC and the Rotbart are very similar (except for the corner tabs), so that sounds like a good explanation.
The one question remaining is why does Jeff's 7 O'Clock have 12 teeth? All of the other razors in this family tree, including the Rotbart (pictured below), have only 11 (narrow) teeth. Moreover, Jeff's 7 O'Clock is the only one with a square channel and squared pegs on the cap.

 

[MacDaddy]

Certainly, the 7 O'Clock SC and the Rotbart are very similar (except for the corner tabs), so that sounds like a good explanation.
The one question remaining is why does Jeff's 7 O'Clock have 12 teeth? All of the other razors in this family tree, including the Rotbart (pictured below), have only 11 (narrow) teeth. Moreover, Jeff's 7 O'Clock is the only one with a square channel and squared pegs on the cap.

That's what I was talking about comparing it to my older Rotbart there. Jeff's seems to bear more resemblance to the older design but has been retrofitted with the channeled guard. Maybe it's just a very early version of that model. The other guard with the thicker outer teeth and 11 inner ones is more in line with the NEW, and I would assume is what they settled into as they got things standardized across the various divisions.

 

[DrAwkward]

That's what I was talking about comparing it to my older Rotbart there. Jeff's seems to bear more resemblance to the older design but has been retrofitted with the channeled guard. Maybe it's just a very early version of that model. The other guard with the thicker outer teeth and 11 inner ones is more in line with the NEW, and I would assume is what they settled into as they got things standardized across the various divisions.

Ooooohhh, I understand your point now. I'm a slow learner. Sorry.

 

[Jeff_H]

Wow, that is some really great information Porter, thank you. I had no idea this discussion was even going on. I am still waiting for the razor to arrive in the mail from England, so I can't offer any further insight via inspection. I'm honestly not sure if it's even coming in a case or not. I got such a good deal that it didn't matter. So it seems most likely that my razor design evolved from the Robart line and was then incorporated to work within the NEW line of razors, the 12 teeth not withstanding. Perhaps an early model produced by 7 O'clock before the 11 vs 12 inner teeth issue was sorted out. There is likely no way to know unless a specific advert for my razor is found and can be dated, a tall order.

I am excited for it to arrive and see if shaving Nirvana lies within.

 

[alex2363]

Thanks, gents. I had thought the sales company was wound up before 1910, but looking more closely I see a few mentions dated as late as 1918: for example http://books.google.com/books?id=ippCAQAAIAAJ&pg=RA18-PA38 in Editor & Publisher, Volume 51, dated 1918-12-07 p38. So reporter confusion is the simplest explanation, I agree.

On the WWI government contract, I found one mention in the September 1918 Blade, with Fahey mentioning "last January when the government business came upon us": I am not 100% sure if he meant January 1917 or 1918, but from our other evidence I assume 1917. He also mentions a pre-wartime production rate of 4000 razors daily, which would work out to almost 1.5M at 365-day production. But 1M is more likely, if they took off weekends and holidays. That fits with the 1917 figure of 1.1M razors sold. But wartime production took that to 20,000 razors daily at the time of publication: 5M at 250 working days per year. Confirming that Fahey mentions delivering 2.5M razors in the preceding six months.



Around the same time Pelham talked to another journalist about advertising and general business outlook. The result was this article in United States Investor, Volume 29, Part 1, Issues 1-26, 1918-03-02 p16b.



This time Pelham mentions 1930. "The first advertisement of the Gillette Safety Razor was placed in 1903 and cost $100. It brought in 187 $5 bills through the mail." Note that he does not mention delivery of any razors, continuing the mystery around the earliest manufacturing dates for production razors. "In January 1904, 175 razors were sold; the next month 1,500; the third month 1,800; the 12th month 19,000; the 24th month 52,000." This does not match data from Nickerson in the Blade, which was 1276, 1255, and 1595 for the first three months and an average of 14,500 sets in each month of Q4. But Nickerson reported production numbers while Pelham reported sales. With that understanding, both are probably correct.

The author of the article goes on to talk about patents and pricing. "We have pointed out from time to time the very apparent fact that practically all of the Gillette Company's assets are in their patents and good will. As the patents expire within a few years it is obvious that the large earnings of the company are almost entirely dependent on printer's ink and the ability of its advertising staff to keep the name of Gillette before the public. It seems probable that the removal of the patent protection which the company now enjoys is going to make a great difference in its business since even the American public is not going to continue indefinitely to pay a monopoly price of $5 a and $1 a dozen for blades...."

Listening closely you can hear the footsteps of the next generation: New Improved razors at $5 for some, and Old Type sets at $1 for everyone else.

I would say that the 1 dollar razor price was both a strategy and necessity it seems. The dollar pricing was affording Gillette the luxury of keeping the Gillette name in mainstream but it also gave them a new marketing arena that included the businesses [ hotels, Levis] and TV media. Gillette put those 1 dollar razors in exclusive ad campaigns like Ivory, Oils, and many other TV venues like the World Series and Boxing.

The regular Joe's could now afford a good razor and off course along with the blades. Gillette Innovation in marketing at it's best.

 

[alex2363]

Thanks, gents. I had thought the sales company was wound up before 1910, but looking more closely I see a few mentions dated as late as 1918: for example http://books.google.com/books?id=ippCAQAAIAAJ&pg=RA18-PA38 in Editor & Publisher, Volume 51, dated 1918-12-07 p38. So reporter confusion is the simplest explanation, I agree.

On the WWI government contract, I found one mention in the September 1918 Blade, with Fahey mentioning "last January when the government business came upon us": I am not 100% sure if he meant January 1917 or 1918, but from our other evidence I assume 1917. He also mentions a pre-wartime production rate of 4000 razors daily, which would work out to almost 1.5M at 365-day production. But 1M is more likely, if they took off weekends and holidays. That fits with the 1917 figure of 1.1M razors sold. But wartime production took that to 20,000 razors daily at the time of publication: 5M at 250 working days per year. Confirming that Fahey mentions delivering 2.5M razors in the preceding six months.



Around the same time Pelham talked to another journalist about advertising and general business outlook. The result was this article in United States Investor, Volume 29, Part 1, Issues 1-26, 1918-03-02 p16b.



This time Pelham mentions 1930. "The first advertisement of the Gillette Safety Razor was placed in 1903 and cost $100. It brought in 187 $5 bills through the mail." Note that he does not mention delivery of any razors, continuing the mystery around the earliest manufacturing dates for production razors. "In January 1904, 175 razors were sold; the next month 1,500; the third month 1,800; the 12th month 19,000; the 24th month 52,000." This does not match data from Nickerson in the Blade, which was 1276, 1255, and 1595 for the first three months and an average of 14,500 sets in each month of Q4. But Nickerson reported production numbers while Pelham reported sales. With that understanding, both are probably correct.

The author of the article goes on to talk about patents and pricing. "We have pointed out from time to time the very apparent fact that practically all of the Gillette Company's assets are in their patents and good will. As the patents expire within a few years it is obvious that the large earnings of the company are almost entirely dependent on printer's ink and the ability of its advertising staff to keep the name of Gillette before the public. It seems probable that the removal of the patent protection which the company now enjoys is going to make a great difference in its business since even the American public is not going to continue indefinitely to pay a monopoly price of $5 a and $1 a dozen for blades...."

Listening closely you can hear the footsteps of the next generation: New Improved razors at $5 for some, and Old Type sets at $1 for everyone else.

I think that Pelhans numbers most likely were inflated. He and his team were caught crunching the numbers by Gaisman during the merger and it seems that this inconsistency probably started at this point anyway.

 

[alex2363]

Certainly, the 7 O'Clock SC and the Rotbart are very similar (except for the corner tabs), so that sounds like a good explanation.
The one question remaining is why does Jeff's 7 O'Clock have 12 teeth? All of the other razors in this family tree, including the Rotbart (pictured below), have only 11 (narrow) teeth. Moreover, Jeff's 7 O'Clock is the only one with a square channel and squared pegs on the cap.

How mnay of these 12 teeth razors has been seen, are there more of the 12 teeth razors known similar to Jeff's?

 

[alex2363]

Wow, that is some really great information Porter, thank you. I had no idea this discussion was even going on. I am still waiting for the razor to arrive in the mail from England, so I can't offer any further insight via inspection. I'm honestly not sure if it's even coming in a case or not. I got such a good deal that it didn't matter. So it seems most likely that my razor design evolved from the Robart line and was then incorporated to work within the NEW line of razors, the 12 teeth not withstanding. Perhaps an early model produced by 7 O'clock before the 11 vs 12 inner teeth issue was sorted out. There is likely no way to know unless a specific advert for my razor is found and can be dated, a tall order.

I am excited for it to arrive and see if shaving Nirvana lies within.

I know, Porter must have lost my party invitation or he just didnt want us in the party.......

 

[mblakele]

This item is a little later than most of the material in this thread, but I hope not too far off-topic. Google books has a copy of Industrial research laboratories of the United States, National Research Council 1940. On p122 this description appeared (emphasis mine, as are any errors):

821. Gillette Safety Razor Company, 47 West First St., Boston, Mass.

President: J.P. Spang, Jr.
Executive officer in charge of research: T.L. Smith, Director of Research.
Research staff: T.L. Smith, Directory; 2 chemists, 1 metallurgist, 2 physicists, 2 engineers; additional personnel 2.
Research activities: The analysis of raw materials; metallurgical studies; abrasives; surface and edge studies; new processes and product development. (Research initiated ca. 1910)

Interesting that there was no official research department until 1910. Of course Nickerson and his staff did quite a bit of R&D before then. But I wonder how the development of the New Improved worked out between this department and the rest of the company?

At a rough guess a research department of this size would have a total budget of around $10M in 2014 dollars. Of course it was probably smaller in 1910, and grew up with the company. Nowadays the Gillette division of P&G has two labs: one in Boston USA and the other in Reading UK.

As far as I could tell no other USA safety razor company reported having an R&D lab at all.

 

[alex2363]

Posted this on another thread:


The Knack was sold as "Slim Twist" and "G2000" from 1978 to 1988, a later version known as "G1000" was made in England and available until 1998. Gillete president Ziegler was working on the Attra razor in the mid to late 60's. He led to the creation of Trac II [ stands for- Twin blade RAzor Cartridge ]. The retooling and training of workers were done in Boston and Berlin. The Boston plant was the main training area for the German new trainees.


Upon Ziegler's retirement in 1976 new Gillette Pres Mockler took over 850 Gillette products being marketed to over 200 countries world wide. [ razors and blades accounted for just 29% of profit]. In August he launched the Attra [ stands for AusTralian Test RAzor] with 7 million dollar marketing campaign. Razor and blades sales fell from 71% in 1979 to 66% in 1985, but were profitable in Europe and Latin America. The new Attra Plus and Good news plus with lube strips were introduced.

They opened blade plants in china, Thailand, operations in Egypt and India. By End of 1983 Gillette had 49 factories in 24 countries and selling it's goods in 200 countries. 58% sales outside USA. Gillette pres Mockler sold less profitable companies and bought other ones at cheaper rate. Gillette faced many hostile takeovers by Philly native Ron Perelman of Revlon Group but he failed. They did give in to billionaire Buffet as he bought into Gillette.

In the mid 80's to late 80's Gillette worked on the Sensor razor, they had to update all of the machinery and train the old Gillette honers on new laser honing gear. They had to retool in Boston and Berlin for the Sensor razor which was considered better than other top Attra, Contour, and Good-news razors. Gillette spent 165 million in ads and promos. They launched the Sensor in 1990 and sold 24 million and shipped 350 million. The demand was so high that Gillette temporarily shut down the Berlin and Boston production to catch up.

[sources, online, Waits, Krumholtz, Mckibben]

 

[mblakele]

Is "Attra" a typo or a historical artifact? Nowadays the spelling is "Atra".

This is a confusing story: apparently Gillette used the name "Atra" as an internal code name for the Trac II, the first generation of twin-blade cartridge. Then a few years later they used Atra again, as the public name for the modern pivoting Atra / Contour product.

McKibben starts his version of the story in 1964: http://books.google.com/books?id=YCldvmXq25EC&pg=PA67. I think McKibben himself got confused about the details, sometimes distinguishing the Rex from the Atra and sometimes conflating them. But it looks like the original Atra (developed 1964-71) was basically a code name for the Trac II, which launched in October 1971 according to McKibben. The modern pivot-head Atra / Contour was the next generation and came out ca. 1976.