Marketing guru, John Clayton of Los Angeles raises a number of issues about
how the possible sale or closure of Steuben Glass may have an impact on
collector’s of Mr. Carder’s works that I think is provocative. John will be one
of our speakers at our September 19-20 Symposium. His part of the program
will be raising questions like these. Instead of feeling sorry for the situation, we need, as a Club, to take action. As many luxury producers have suffered, some have flourished. The best hope of Steuben staying in business is for a company that focuses on luxury items (e.g., Louis Vuitton is part of LVMH.com, the parent company) to purchase them. Similarly, as difficult as it may be for you to read this, Tiffany would be an outstanding partner that would bring a halo effect to the brand.

Secondly, the Club (or do we prefer to say “society”) has a vested, financial interest, whether it is clear or not to the by-stander. The club membership owns in excess of $40,000,000 of Carder Steuben glass by the estimates of active members. Whether we like it or not, if Steuben were to go under, then all advertising for the brand would stop. That has a ripple effect on the perceived value of the brand name (the level of “prestige,” “desirability”, etc.) and, even though we do not collect “colorless” glass, if that market bottoms out, then expect Carder Steuben glass to be impacted.

Lots of mail and reaction to events at Steuben Glass and our e-mail on the
subject.

From Ellen Teller of Ann Arbor:
About 15 years ago, when I was at a conference in Corning, there was a
discussion of Steuben Glass. Someone in the company said that they were
considering making some of the Carder pieces. Of course that never happened.
One wonders if they had gone that route whether they might not have lost so
much money.

From eagle eye Lon Knickerbocker of Dansville, NY a response to John Clayton’s
thoughts:
I hope all is well, and for the first time will make a comment regarding one of your latest subjects. I strongly disagree with Mr. Claytons analysis and opinions regarding how the sale or closure of Steuben might affect the collectible aspect of our hobby. There are many collectible fields out there, and I am not aware of any that have been impacted negatively by the closing of its manufacturer. I have collected Steuben and other items for many years and have dealt in the antique business for 35+ years.
I will give some examples. Carnival glass was made and marketed by 5 primary companies in our country. Northwood has not produced glass since 1919 or so, and Millersburg not since the early teens. In fact Millersburg only produced glass for about 21 months. In spite of the fact these companies have not promoted their products for the last 90 years, records are being set constantly for this glass. In the art glass field, Durand glass is extremely desirable to both collectors and dealers alike, yet the company quit advertising in 1931.
I can cite hundreds of collectibles in this manner but that would become repetitious.
To suggest that closing Steuben would have a negative ripple effect and somehow the “prestige and desirability” of the glass would be compromised in a negative way is just foolish. On the contrary, when people hear of the closing (should that happen) people will have increased interest.
What generates interest in clubs and organizations, like the Carder Steuben group, is generally leadership, creativeness, effort, enthusiasm and other positive qualities.
In your previous e-mail you mention a program you recently put on with another member, David Brown. You suggested those in attendance were not aware of “glass like this”. I guess all of Steuben’s “advertising” had not reached these people, however I’ll
bet your program did.
Even Mr. Clayton’s last observation, that we do not collect “colorless” glass, suggests he is poorly informed at best. Fredrick Carder designed some amazing “colorless” glass, including beautiful cut examples, his cire perdue pieces, Luminor and on and on. I personally have some of these items in my collection and treasure them highly, as do other collectors.
One man’s opinion,
A crytic note and agreement with Lon from David Winfield of St. Louis:

Marketing guru, John Clayton is full of (edited)! Carder glass is forever.
I guess I would ask David how he really feels.

Then from Audrey Lipton of NYC:
So shocked to learn about the possible sale or even closure of Steuben. You are
on an interesting path in suggesting the sale of the company to a solvent,
compatible, business such as Tiffany’s. Steuben has been important in so many
ways; one of its greatest features is that it has always been a uniquely American
company. For that reason pieces of Steuben glass were frequently given as gifts
from our various presidents to other heads of state all over the world. To allow
this wonderful company that has survived for over a century to just fade out is
not acceptable. There is currently afloat the impression that perhaps the
“brand” failed to keep up with changes in the marketplace. That it is not
profitable is indicative that something has been missing in its marketing
mission. Action must be taken – and soon. If there is any way I might be of assistance in this important project, it would be my pleasure to participate. Well Audrey, in my next newsletter we’ll deal with this arena of whether anything can be done to help.

From Gerry Eggert:
I agree with both Mr. Clayton and Lon Knickerbocker. My impression is the
“collector base” is shrinking. A good example is my daughter. Lovely and bright as
she is, she has no time or interest in collecting “old” glass. Modern yes! Old no!
She is not alone. At the auctions I go to in the Rochester, NY region, there are
very few younger people. Same for the many Antique Malls–few young people.
I think losing the constant advertising that Steuben Glass does will negatively
impact the identification of “new” buyers, who eventually become the newest
collectors. I am not surprised about Steuben’s closing. If Fenton cannot survive in West
Virginia, how can Steuben survive with New York State’s higher overhead?

From Gordon Hancock of Patchogue, NY
I am not A Steuben collector , I collect Tiffany Pastel. I must agree with
Lon Knickerbocker. Louis Comfort Tiffany has not produced glass for over 60
years yet the market for L.C.T glass very strong. On the contrary the closing of the plant may well stimulate interest in Steuben as people rush to buy it because no new pieces will ever be made!

Stephen Gleissner of the Wichita Museum comments:
It is amusing to think of Tiffany’s being interested in saving Steuben, for Tiffany’s is a
prime example–indeed exponent–of the problem faced by Steuben. For a generation
now, most of the crystal sold by Tiffany & Co. with their sticker on it has
been made in Eastern Europe . . . Not in France, Ireland, or the U.S. The almost
impossible challenge faced by the Corning administration is not marketing, which they
are literally text book examples of, but the global economy, especially regarding
labor and materials. When Polish workers can produce good quality crystal at a
fraction of the cost of Steuben or Baccarat, and the majority of consumers can’t tell the
difference (or don’t care) anyway, what is going to be the consumer’s choice?

Finally for today a note from Dean Six, Curator at the West Virginia Museum of Glass
in Harrisville, WV:
Any time I reply to these posts from Alan I feel like I am stepping into the gates of hell and risking everything. But silence has never been my strength. I did, wisely, wait a day before replying to the John Clayton comments on brand identity, factory closings and impact on value. I am pleased that others saw the greater reality of the collectors mind and market and made those points for me/ us. I would add a set of observations: in 2007 Fenton Art Glass announced their impending closing. Before everyone goes frantic, I am not suggesting it is the same market at all, but being one of the few other handmade American glass companies surviving and having a wide following including collectors and clubs, etc., there are obvious parallels. The impact was a soaring show of increased sales, prices rose – at times wildly so- and interest and business peaked. Corporate restructuring and downsizing has allowed Fenton to continue for now but the impact and support lingers- support came from many quarters to sustain them. Prices did not fall. Quite the contrary happened. I would repeat a line I have often used in the past decade of glass lectures: Asking if an American Glass company will close is not the question today but we might ask when will they close. Not fatalism but probably reality. Also not what Anyone wants to hear.
More to follow tomorrow.