Sears, Craftsman, Stanley, and China

On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:


> Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
> stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
> to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
> "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
> facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
> Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
> ready to ship.
>

Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
Stanly branded tools take that market share.

On Sun, 21 May 2017 07:07:03 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I came upon a bit of information today that sheds a good bit of light on
>the Sears and Craftsman situation.
>
>The whole article is about a lawsuit between Sears and "One World
>Technologies", which is apparently a supplier of Craftsman tools. This
>made no sense to me since I thought that Stanley now owned Craftsman and
>any purchases of Craftsman tools would be from Stanley from now on. Then I
>got to this paragraph:
>
>"Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
>year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
>sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
>years."
>
>Note--"by its existing suppliers".
>
>So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
>Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
>on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
>existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
>manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.

Essentially, Stanley just bought the name. They can sell "Craftsman"
to other outlets.
>
>So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
>if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?

Note sure where that hope came from. The Donald? ;-)

>Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
>sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.

On Mon, 22 May 2017 08:54:51 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 05/21/2017 3:32 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 May 2017 07:07:03 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>...
>
>>> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
>>> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
>>
>> Note sure where that hope came from. The Donald? ;-)
>...
>
>Maybe from SBD's presentation for analyst's at the time of the merger?
>
>Presentation leading bullets were:
>
>Stanley Black & Decker To Purchase Craftsman Brand From Sears Holdings…
>•Obtaining Rights To Develop, Manufacture And Sell Craftsman Brand In
>Non-Sears Retail, Industrial & Online Channels
>•Sears To Continue Developing, Sourcing & Selling Craftsman In All Sears
>Retail Channels Under Perpetual License Agreement
>•SBD To Significantly Increase Availability And Innovation Of Craftsman
>Products And Add Manufacturing In the U.S. To Support Growth
>...
>
>The one I think they're dreaming over is "To contribute ~$100M Of
>Average Annual Revenue Growth Per Year For Approximately Next Ten Years"
>
>Link provided earlier for rest...

And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
press, it's wrong.

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 11:27:29 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

> >The one I think they're dreaming over is "To contribute ~$100M Of=20
> >Average Annual Revenue Growth Per Year For Approximately Next Ten Years"
> >
> >Link provided earlier for rest...
>=20
> And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
> press, it's wrong.

Something to that. Between incomplete reporting, reporting before all fina=
l facts are known, and using poor resources, sometimes it is hard to know w=
hat is current, factual, and applicable.

It will be interesting to see what happens to their investment over the nex=
t several years. The Craftsman name has value due to its provenance and the=
idea that certain of their tools will have a worry free lifetime warranty.

What if they use the Ridgid scenario and tools purchased from different ven=
dors carry different warranties, even if it is the same exact product? Wil=
l each vendor have to honor a "Craftsman" sale? The local ACE hardware tha=
t sells Craftsman now (franchisee, not national store) does not honor Sears=
pricing from the weekly sales circular!

If it wasn't so sad to see the demise of a company I thought so highly of i=
n the 60s and 70s, I would be glad to get the popcorn and watch the cats fi=
ght this one out.

Robert

On 22 May 2017 23:03:13 GMT, notbob <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 2017-05-22, Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I happened to visit Sears today. They offered me $10 (off my next
>> purchase of $30) for my email address. I declined, I remember the last
>> time I gave them an email address, I was spammed for years...
>
>Give 'em yer worst enemies email address! ;)

One of the guys I work with had a crazy ex who did that, and worse.
She gave out his cell number to text spammers, too, but none of that
came close to the poisoned cake.

On 5/22/2017 6:30 PM, [email protected] wrote:

> There comes a point where it's just time to put it out of its misery.
> Sears crossed that line for me at least 15 years ago. They seem to
> try to piss me off every time I go into a store.
>

15 years? It has been ar least 35 for me. Got the Sears Christmas
catalog and we ordered a bunch fo stuff. When I ent to pick up the
order they had one of about 15 items ordered. I've not been back since.

I do have some 50 year old Craftsman tool though and like the more than
most tools made today.

Sears never made their own tools in their own factory. They used jobbers a=
nd contractors to make their tools. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, it=
has been done for centuries. The good thing about Sears was that at one t=
ime the specifications Sears set made their product quite good. Their bull=
etproof warranty made it a no brainer for certain tools.

I remember about 30-40 years ago going into the Sears "tool store" they had=
at the big Sears here in town that was conveniently by my house. I often =
recognized rebadged products. Different color of molded parts, a usually a=
couple of Sears marked goodies were all that were different.

Then I noticed a lot of different manufacturers we selling "DIY" lines (for=
example, Sears "Companion" line) that were made in other countries. Then =
it became to easy to have a lot of top shelf products made "over there", wh=
erever that might be, so the crap tool Tsunami began. I couldn't tell wher=
e tools were made (I ALWAYS wanted to buy American first as an allegiance t=
o my blue collar roots)after a while. Tools were label on the box they cam=
e in with their COO, and I thought when I looked at the tool and it had the=
company's American address on it the tool was made here. Nope, not necess=
arily; the label could just be a reference to the company.

They American tools were assembled here using parts "sources" from other co=
untries. So people like Porter Cable, Bosch, etc. had tools made here or o=
verseas, made from parts made here or overseas. never saw any country othe=
r than the USA when I was buying and I didn't care if a tool came from Swit=
zerland, Germany, Italy, or anywhere else. If it wasn't American, I didn't=
buy it. =20

I gave that up, though. As companies bought one another, were absorbed by =
one another, used manufacturing facilities and parts from one another, then=
were bought by investment firms that saw tools as widgets... I now just bu=
y using my "bang for the buck" metric.

Now I see that DeWalt is sporting a new American flag logo on the boxes tha=
t tout MADE IN USA .... and in much smaller print... "using global material=
s"...

So we now have factories in the USA that have workers that screw parts toge=
ther and call it tool making, parts that are made somewhere else. I doubt =
that if it wasn't a populist trend these days, this new logo wouldn't have =
been noticed.

I don't know how anyone can keep up with who owns who, who can make what pr=
oducts, which patents are licensed out, which company is a subsidiary or pa=
rtner of another (remember... Bosch partnered with Fein on a recent project=
!) and on a on.

I am sad to see Craftsman/Sears go away, but this agreement just seems like=
an natural end to a tool line (Craftsman and their unrealistic lifetime wa=
rranty) and even more so, and end to a business model that should have been=
abandoned years ago.

Robert

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 5/21/2017 7:07 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >
> > I came upon a bit of information today that sheds a good bit of light on
> > the Sears and Craftsman situation.
> >
> > The whole article is about a lawsuit between Sears and "One World
> > Technologies", which is apparently a supplier of Craftsman tools. This
> > made no sense to me since I thought that Stanley now owned Craftsman and
> > any purchases of Craftsman tools would be from Stanley from now on. Then I
> > got to this paragraph:
> >
> > "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
> > year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
> > sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
> > years."
> >
> > Note--"by its existing suppliers".
> >
> > So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
> > Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
> > on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
> > existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
> > manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
> >
> > So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
> > if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
> >
> > Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
> > sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.
> >
>
> They have three options.

Who is "they"? You seem to be conflating Stanley with Sears.

> Keep buying from existing suppliers and make a profit on the resale.
> After 15 years phase out the existing suppliers and take over manufacturing
> Phase out the Craftsman brand. That can be done at any time.
>
> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 5/21/2017 11:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >>> "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
> >>> year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
> >>> sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
> >>> years."
> >>>
> >>> Note--"by its existing suppliers".
> >>>
> >>> So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
> >>> Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
> >>> on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
> >>> existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
> >>> manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
> >>>
> >>> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
> >>> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
> >>> sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.
> >>>
> >>
> >> They have three options.
> >
> > Who is "they"? You seem to be conflating Stanley with Sears.
>
> No, "they" is Stanley. Sears does not have those options. Stanley
> bought the 15 year deal.

And the point I am making is that the "deal" doesn't seem to be what I (and
apparently you as well) thought it was.

> >> Keep buying from existing suppliers and make a profit on the resale

The whole point of my post is that apparently sears DOES have the option of
continuing to buy from their existing suppliers and not from Stanley. They
are taking one of their existing suppliers to court over a contract to
supply tools to be sold by Sears under the Craftsman name. It is SEARS
doing this, ***NOT*** Stanley. And the supplier is ****NOT*** Stanley.

> >> After 15 years phase out the existing suppliers and take over manufacturing

There was nothing about Stanley being obligated to use Sears' existing
suppliers. Perhaps that is also in the contract but given that Stanley has
been talking about moving production back onshore it seems unlikely.
Stanley could start making tools in their own factory under the Craftsman
brand now. Sears appears to be under no obligation to sell those tools in
their stores.

> >> Phase out the Craftsman brand. That can be done at any time.

Actually that is not in Stanley's power at all. While they own the rights
to the name, they aren't selling much of anything under that brand so
there's nothing to "phase out". Sears does have the power to do it since
they _do_ have products. Perhaps Sears will choose to do that. Seems a
bonehead move if they do but it won't be the first bonehead move a big
retailer has made.

> >> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.

Who do you think has the power to shut anything down? Stanley did not buy
Sears so they most assuredly cannot shut Sears down. Sears has the right
to use the name without royalties for the next 15 years, so Stanley can't
shut _that_ down. And the lawsuit shows that Sears (***NOT*** Stanley) now
does and expects to continue to buy tools from One World Technologies to be
sold under the Craftsman brand. One World Technologies is NOT owned by
Stanley, One World is the parent company of Ryobi, and is thus a direct
competitor to Stanley. So how is Stanley going to shut Craftsman down?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 5/21/2017 1:48 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 5/21/2017 11:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
> >>>>> year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
> >>>>> sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
> >>>>> years."
>
> >>>> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.
> >
> > Who do you think has the power to shut anything down? Stanley did not buy
> > Sears so they most assuredly cannot shut Sears down. Sears has the right
> > to use the name without royalties for the next 15 years, so Stanley can't
> > shut _that_ down. And the lawsuit shows that Sears (***NOT*** Stanley) now
> > does and expects to continue to buy tools from One World Technologies to be
> > sold under the Craftsman brand. One World Technologies is NOT owned by
> > Stanley, One World is the parent company of Ryobi, and is thus a direct
> > competitor to Stanley. So how is Stanley going to shut Craftsman down?
> >
>
> If Sears sold Craftsman to Stanley they must hve given them some
> control. Depending on how much, Stanley can just shut down anything
> sold under that name. Sears won't be around in 15 years. Maybe not
> even another year as they spirol down.

I don't think you get it. "Craftsman" is a name, not a company. What
Stanley got was the right to use the name. Sears however did not give up
their own right to use the name. The deal was that Sears can use it for 15
years without paying Stanley anything for the privilege of using it and
after that they have to give Stanley a percentage of the take.

Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
"Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
ready to ship.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> On Sun, 21 May 2017 07:07:03 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >I came upon a bit of information today that sheds a good bit of light on
> >the Sears and Craftsman situation.
> >
> >The whole article is about a lawsuit between Sears and "One World
> >Technologies", which is apparently a supplier of Craftsman tools. This
> >made no sense to me since I thought that Stanley now owned Craftsman and
> >any purchases of Craftsman tools would be from Stanley from now on. Then I
> >got to this paragraph:
> >
> >"Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
> >year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
> >sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
> >years."
> >
> >Note--"by its existing suppliers".
> >
> >So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
> >Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
> >on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
> >existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
> >manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
> >
> >So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
> >if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
>
> Very simple.
> On THEIR Craftsman tools they put "Craftsman by Stanley" or "Craftsman
> Proffessional", os some other distinctive branding. Even "Craftsman
> American". Or "Craftsman Classic" -Not that hard to distinguish.
> >
> >Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
> >sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.

"Craftsman Professional" is a brand that Sears uses--there are tools on the
shelf at Sears now marked "Craftsman Professional". "Craftsman Classic" is
a good idea.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>
> > Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
> > stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
> > to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
> > "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
> > facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
> > Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
> > ready to ship.
> >
>
> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
> Stanly branded tools take that market share.

To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
"shut down". If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> On Sun, 21 May 2017 18:12:54 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
> >> > stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
> >> > to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
> >> > "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
> >> > facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
> >> > Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
> >> > ready to ship.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
> >> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
> >> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
> >> Stanly branded tools take that market share.
> >
> >To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
> >"shut down". If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
> >they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
> >bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
> >eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
> >to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.
>
> I don't think Stanley is worried that their cash is going to save
> Sears.

The point is that if the objective was to eliminate a competitor, why
bother at all?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On 5/21/2017 6:12 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
> >> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
> >> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
> >> Stanly branded tools take that market share.
> >
> > To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
> > "shut down".
>
> We could also have a pissing contest on some loosely used terminology.
> You go first. Oh, Ok, you win.
>
>
> If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
> > they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
> > bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
> > eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
> > to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.
> >
>
> Probably, I thought it was money down the drain, but I'm not in the
> business and was not part of the negotiations. Anything here is
> speculation. Neither of us has facts.

This started out with me providing some facts.

On 5/21/2017 6:12 PM, J. Clarke wrote:

>> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
>> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
>> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
>> Stanly branded tools take that market share.
>
> To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
> "shut down".

We could also have a pissing contest on some loosely used terminology.
You go first. Oh, Ok, you win.


If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
> they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
> bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
> eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
> to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.
>

Probably, I thought it was money down the drain, but I'm not in the
business and was not part of the negotiations. Anything here is
speculation. Neither of us has facts.

On Sun, 21 May 2017 07:07:03 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I came upon a bit of information today that sheds a good bit of light on
>the Sears and Craftsman situation.
>
>The whole article is about a lawsuit between Sears and "One World
>Technologies", which is apparently a supplier of Craftsman tools. This
>made no sense to me since I thought that Stanley now owned Craftsman and
>any purchases of Craftsman tools would be from Stanley from now on. Then I
>got to this paragraph:
>
>"Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
>year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
>sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
>years."
>
>Note--"by its existing suppliers".
>
>So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
>Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
>on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
>existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
>manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
>
>So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
>if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?

Very simple.
On THEIR Craftsman tools they put "Craftsman by Stanley" or "Craftsman
Proffessional", os some other distinctive branding. Even "Craftsman
American". Or "Craftsman Classic" -Not that hard to distinguish.
>
>Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
>sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.

On 5/21/2017 7:07 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> I came upon a bit of information today that sheds a good bit of light on
> the Sears and Craftsman situation.
>
> The whole article is about a lawsuit between Sears and "One World
> Technologies", which is apparently a supplier of Craftsman tools. This
> made no sense to me since I thought that Stanley now owned Craftsman and
> any purchases of Craftsman tools would be from Stanley from now on. Then I
> got to this paragraph:
>
> "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
> year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
> sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
> years."
>
> Note--"by its existing suppliers".
>
> So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
> Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
> on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
> existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
> manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
>
> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
>
> Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
> sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.
>

They have three options.
Keep buying from existing suppliers and make a profit on the resale.
After 15 years phase out the existing suppliers and take over manufacturing
Phase out the Craftsman brand. That can be done at any time.

It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.

On Mon, 22 May 2017 15:09:36 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 05/22/2017 11:27 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>...
>
>> And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
>> press, it's wrong.
>
>Au contraire...if corporation were to _deliberately_ mislead financial
>press it's certain route to self-destruction of investor confidence and
>hence stock price, etc., etc., etc., ...
>
>In extreme, that could also lead to serious difficulties with SEC.
>
>Remember when Enron tried that?

There is a big difference in pulling the shades over investor's eyes
and handing them a really cool pair of pink eyeglasses.

On Sun, 21 May 2017 17:23:08 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>
>> Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
>> stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
>> to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
>> "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
>> facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
>> Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
>> ready to ship.
>>
>
>Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
>name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
>back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
>Stanly branded tools take that market share.
The Craftsman name IS an assett - shutting it down after paying the
price they paid would be EXTREMELY foolish.

On 2017-05-21, J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:

> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?

I bought some Craftsman combo wrenches about 4 yrs ago. They had a
set that was labeled "Made in the USA" and a set labeled, "Made in
China". Same set, essentially, but the USA labeled wrenches cost a
bit more. Natch, I bought the former.

Were they really made in USA or jes assembled. Even worse,
made/assembled on Guam, by Chinese workers, in a Chinese owned
factory, and merely labeled "Made in USA"? This is entirely legal,
now, and where much of our USA labeled stuff comes from. ;)

nb

On 2017-05-22, Bill <[email protected]> wrote:

> I happened to visit Sears today. They offered me $10 (off my next
> purchase of $30) for my email address. I declined, I remember the last
> time I gave them an email address, I was spammed for years...

Give 'em yer worst enemies email address! ;)

nb

On 2017-05-22, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:

> 15 years? It has been ar least 35 for me.

40 yrs, here! ....and I once worked for 'em.

I was wrenching on a motorcycle and the 10mm Craftsman combo wrench I
was using, broke. Half the open-end jes snapped off. Back then,
Craftsman replaced any broken items, immediately. Unfortunately, the
closest Sears was almost 100 miles away. 8|

nb

On 5/21/2017 11:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:

>>> "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
>>> year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
>>> sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
>>> years."
>>>
>>> Note--"by its existing suppliers".
>>>
>>> So it looks like the Stanley deal doesn't actually change anything for
>>> Sears except that they got a cash influx and have to start paying a royalty
>>> on the brand 15 years down the road. If they can continue to use "their
>>> existing suppliers" then they can continue to use their Chinese wrench
>>> manufacturer no matter what Stanley decides to do.
>>>
>>> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
>>> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
>>>
>>> Anyway, the whole article is at <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-
>>> sears-craftsman-one-world-lawsuit-0516-biz-20170515-story.html>.
>>>
>>
>> They have three options.
>
> Who is "they"? You seem to be conflating Stanley with Sears.

No, "they" is Stanley. Sears does not have those options. Stanley
bought the 15 year deal.

>
>> Keep buying from existing suppliers and make a profit on the resale
>> After 15 years phase out the existing suppliers and take over manufacturing

>> Phase out the Craftsman brand. That can be done at any time.
>>
>> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.

On 05/21/2017 9:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
...

> They have three options.
> Keep buying from existing suppliers and make a profit on the resale.
> After 15 years phase out the existing suppliers and take over manufacturing
> Phase out the Craftsman brand. That can be done at any time.
>
> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.

With the clarification you mean Stanley by "they", that's certainly
_not_ "their" options...

Nothing indicates Sears sold the manufactured _product_ or the contracts
they have in place for future product; in fact the Stanley releases
imply that. Stanley has to either negotiate additional output from
existing suppliers Sears has under contract or produce product on their
own.

But they have no obligation 15-yr deal or not to use existing contracts
and indicate they structured the deal specifically to not incur any
Sears obligation Sears might be unable to fulfill.

They indicate they do intend to expand US manufacturing facilities to
supply product.

Sears, otoh, has the ability to continue to sell and develop product
essentially unchanged until the 15yr window expires at which time they
must pay royalties. That is, of course, the big if of it they're still
around that long.

Stanley put out a presentation that covers their viewpoint at the time
of the sale announcement that gives some insight to their thinking. I
think they're all wet, but they didn't ask! :)

<http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NjU2MjMwfENoaWxkSUQ9MzYyMzAzfFR5cGU9MQ==&t=1>

Another mag's take...

<http://forgingmagazine.com/forming/new-plant-may-follow-stanley-black-decker-craftsman-deal>

--

On 05/21/2017 4:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
...

> Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
> stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
> to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
> "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
> facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
> Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
> ready to ship.

I've wondered where the tools Ace Hardware is selling are actually
coming from 'ere now and have had no luck in actually finding out the chain.

I've not been interested enough to try to do some specific looking at
in-store stock to compare the stock numbers but I'm guessing at the
moment it's the latter of the above options they're using. They've not
had time to put a new production line together and it isn't at all clear
that Sears even has the ability to sell the actual production drawings
that would be needed to reproduce the tools that OWT builds for them
from the public disclosures and I'd suspect that is their intellectual
property, not Sears' anyways; only the higher-level spec's may belong to
Sears but it's not clear even that was sold to Stanley.

All in all, looks to me as though Stanley bought the proverbial "pig in
a poke" -- not certain what their longterm plans are for making it
profitable even from the aforementioned presentation they gave to
analysts at the announcement. Seems a peculiar arrangement...


--

On 05/21/2017 3:32 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 21 May 2017 07:07:03 -0400, "J. Clarke"
...

>> So much for the hope that Stanley will bring Craftsman back onshore. Even
>> if they do how will they distinguish their stuff from what Sears sells?
>
> Note sure where that hope came from. The Donald? ;-)
...

Maybe from SBD's presentation for analyst's at the time of the merger?

Presentation leading bullets were:

Stanley Black & Decker To Purchase Craftsman Brand From Sears Holdings…
•Obtaining Rights To Develop, Manufacture And Sell Craftsman Brand In
Non-Sears Retail, Industrial & Online Channels
•Sears To Continue Developing, Sourcing & Selling Craftsman In All Sears
Retail Channels Under Perpetual License Agreement
•SBD To Significantly Increase Availability And Innovation Of Craftsman
Products And Add Manufacturing In the U.S. To Support Growth
...

The one I think they're dreaming over is "To contribute ~$100M Of
Average Annual Revenue Growth Per Year For Approximately Next Ten Years"

Link provided earlier for rest...

--

On 05/22/2017 11:27 AM, [email protected] wrote:
...

> And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
> press, it's wrong.

Au contraire...if corporation were to _deliberately_ mislead financial
press it's certain route to self-destruction of investor confidence and
hence stock price, etc., etc., etc., ...

In extreme, that could also lead to serious difficulties with SEC.

Remember when Enron tried that?

--

[email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 22 May 2017 13:36:38 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 11:27:29 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>> The one I think they're dreaming over is "To contribute ~$100M Of
>>>> Average Annual Revenue Growth Per Year For Approximately Next Ten Years"
>>>>
>>>> Link provided earlier for rest...
>>> And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
>>> press, it's wrong.
>> Something to that. Between incomplete reporting, reporting before all final facts are known, and using poor resources, sometimes it is hard to know what is current, factual, and applicable.
>>
>> It will be interesting to see what happens to their investment over the next several years. The Craftsman name has value due to its provenance and the idea that certain of their tools will have a worry free lifetime warranty.
> The "worry free warranty" has been suspect for a few decades. It
> seems to vary by store and perhaps even manager on duty.
>
>> What if they use the Ridgid scenario and tools purchased from different vendors carry different warranties, even if it is the same exact product? Will each vendor have to honor a "Craftsman" sale? The local ACE hardware that sells Craftsman now (franchisee, not national store) does not honor Sears pricing from the weekly sales circular!
> Purchased by individuals from different stores? If that's what you
> mean, I wouldn't be surprised by it at all. I certainly wouldn't
> expect an ACE Hardware store to replace a ratchet bought at Sears. I
> really don't expect them to be the same tools, in fact.
>
>> If it wasn't so sad to see the demise of a company I thought so highly of in the 60s and 70s, I would be glad to get the popcorn and watch the cats fight this one out.
> There comes a point where it's just time to put it out of its misery.
> Sears crossed that line for me at least 15 years ago. They seem to
> try to piss me off every time I go into a store.

I happened to visit Sears today. They offered me $10 (off my next
purchase of $30) for my email address. I declined, I remember the last
time I gave them an email address, I was spammed for years...

On 5/21/2017 1:48 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 5/21/2017 11:24 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>>> "Sears sold its Craftsman tool brand to Stanley Black & Decker earlier this
>>>>> year in a deal valued at $900 million. The deal gives Sears the right to
>>>>> sell Craftsman products made by its existing suppliers royalty-free for 15
>>>>> years."

>>>> It is not uncommon to buy a competitor and shut them down.
>
> Who do you think has the power to shut anything down? Stanley did not buy
> Sears so they most assuredly cannot shut Sears down. Sears has the right
> to use the name without royalties for the next 15 years, so Stanley can't
> shut _that_ down. And the lawsuit shows that Sears (***NOT*** Stanley) now
> does and expects to continue to buy tools from One World Technologies to be
> sold under the Craftsman brand. One World Technologies is NOT owned by
> Stanley, One World is the parent company of Ryobi, and is thus a direct
> competitor to Stanley. So how is Stanley going to shut Craftsman down?
>

If Sears sold Craftsman to Stanley they must hve given them some
control. Depending on how much, Stanley can just shut down anything
sold under that name. Sears won't be around in 15 years. Maybe not
even another year as they spirol down.

On 5/21/2017 9:07 PM, J. Clarke wrote:

>>
>> If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
>>> they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
>>> bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
>>> eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
>>> to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.
>>>
>>
>> Probably, I thought it was money down the drain, but I'm not in the
>> business and was not part of the negotiations. Anything here is
>> speculation. Neither of us has facts.
>
> This started out with me providing some facts.
>
Some facts. My guess is the post here did not have all the details of
the agreement.

On Sun, 21 May 2017 18:12:54 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
>> > stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
>> > to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
>> > "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
>> > facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
>> > Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
>> > ready to ship.
>> >
>>
>> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
>> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
>> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
>> Stanly branded tools take that market share.
>
>To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
>"shut down". If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
>they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
>bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
>eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
>to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.

I don't think Stanley is worried that their cash is going to save
Sears.

On 5/21/2017 7:00 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> says...
>>
>> On Sun, 21 May 2017 18:12:54 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On 5/21/2017 5:09 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Stanley didn't get a factory, they didn't get workers, or foremen, or
>>>>> stocks of materials, or contracts with suppliers. There's nothing for them
>>>>> to "shut down". If Stanley wants to sell tools that are labelled
>>>>> "Craftsman" they are going to have to start making them in their own
>>>>> facilities, make their own agreements with suppliers, or buy them from
>>>>> Sears which already has such agreements in place and has stocks of product
>>>>> ready to ship.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once Sears is gone (probably soon) Stanley can shut down the Craftsman
>>>> name if they desire. They own it. They can improve it and bring it
>>>> back to what it was 40 years ago or get rid of the competition allowing
>>>> Stanly branded tools take that market share.
>>>
>>> To say that they can "shut it down" implies that Stanley has something to
>>> "shut down". If Stanley decides not to do anything with the brand that
>>> they just paid lots of money for, then it could die with Sears, which is a
>>> bit different from being "shut down". Although if the objective is to
>>> eliminate a competitor, it would have been a lot cheaper and more effective
>>> to _not_ give that competitor a large cash infusion.
>>
>> I don't think Stanley is worried that their cash is going to save
>> Sears.
>
> The point is that if the objective was to eliminate a competitor, why
> bother at all?
>

Beats me IMO, had they waited a while they could have gotten the use of
the Craftsman name for 50 bucks cash. Sears has been gone and in death
throes for years. Slow at first, but picking up speed.

On Mon, 22 May 2017 13:36:38 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 11:27:29 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> >The one I think they're dreaming over is "To contribute ~$100M Of
>> >Average Annual Revenue Growth Per Year For Approximately Next Ten Years"
>> >
>> >Link provided earlier for rest...
>>
>> And you believe news blurbs intended for investors? If it's in the
>> press, it's wrong.
>
>Something to that. Between incomplete reporting, reporting before all final facts are known, and using poor resources, sometimes it is hard to know what is current, factual, and applicable.
>
>It will be interesting to see what happens to their investment over the next several years. The Craftsman name has value due to its provenance and the idea that certain of their tools will have a worry free lifetime warranty.

The "worry free warranty" has been suspect for a few decades. It
seems to vary by store and perhaps even manager on duty.

>What if they use the Ridgid scenario and tools purchased from different vendors carry different warranties, even if it is the same exact product? Will each vendor have to honor a "Craftsman" sale? The local ACE hardware that sells Craftsman now (franchisee, not national store) does not honor Sears pricing from the weekly sales circular!

Purchased by individuals from different stores? If that's what you
mean, I wouldn't be surprised by it at all. I certainly wouldn't
expect an ACE Hardware store to replace a ratchet bought at Sears. I
really don't expect them to be the same tools, in fact.

>If it wasn't so sad to see the demise of a company I thought so highly of in the 60s and 70s, I would be glad to get the popcorn and watch the cats fight this one out.

There comes a point where it's just time to put it out of its misery.
Sears crossed that line for me at least 15 years ago. They seem to
try to piss me off every time I go into a store.