The Designers’ Eyes

June 30, 2008   by in UnCategorized   

By Home Furnishings Business in on July 2008 The old joke about furniture knockoffs used to be “design by Polaroid.” These days, it might be better phrased “design by digital.” Bill Faber remembers some knockoffs that involved even lazier efforts for lookalike furniture—taking a page, literally, from a manufacturer’s catalog.

“In the late ‘90s, a manufacturer might buy a piece of furniture, take it to China and knock it off,” said Faber, vice president of wood product design for Century Furniture and the creator of several collections that have been imitated in the marketplace. “It was more piecemeal than entire collections. We had people doing furniture design by ripping pages out of catalogs.”

Faber believes furniture knockoffs peaked around 10 years ago, but another point of view is that current economic conditions and their effect on the furniture business continue to make copycat furniture an issue for those truly creative companies in the industry.

“I don’t believed it’s changed much in recent years—success breeds knockoffs, especially when the economy is tough and fewer products receive recognition in the marketplace,” said Max Shangle, chairman of the furniture design program at Kendall College of Art and Design in Grand Rapids, Mich. “It’s a function of the economy, but it’s also a function of laziness.”

Shangle, who serves as an expert witness in product liability and design infringement cases, has seen his share of knockoff cases from both the plaintiff and defendant point of view.

“If I have a message here, it’s that in the long run knockoffs don’t help retailers, they don’t help consumers and they don’t help manufacturers—the only ones they help are the ones doing them,” Shangle said. “They don’t move the industry forward. We always need new, better designs—we don’t need copies. At the end of the day, where it’s tolerated is out in the marketplace.”

RIDING COATTAILS

Scott Coley and his design partner, Tom McDaniel, have created collections for numerous furniture vendors, including three Pinnacle Awards winners for their work with Bernhardt, Charleston Forge and Madison Square.

“I’ve seen dead knockoffs of some of our work—not only individual pieces, but full collections—multiple times,” said Coley, who’s based in Morganton, N.C. Knockoffs, he said, “continue to be a problem. If your create something less expensive that’s confusingly similar to a higher-cost collection, it shortens the life span of the more expensive product. That first piece that comes out is not going to be the cheap date.”

One issue is that many furniture collections are based on historical styles that have a long precedent. Can anyone really knockoff, say, a Louis Philippe collection?

“Louis Philippe is a really good example,” Coley said. “There was a historic period when the original product was made and that led into things like American Empire and Directoire. Anyone can pull historic elements out of the antiques without it being a knockoff.”

Shield hardware, for example, has a historic reference that would make it fair game for use in a collection.

“What makes it a knockoff is when you’re not inspired by historical reference,” Coley said, “but reproduce exactly someone else’s interpretation of that period”—that is, a dead knockoff.

Faber also believes there are ways to develop collections in traditional styles that put a distinctive twist on familiar forms.

“When you’re designing period pieces, you’re relying on antiques, architectural elements and the style of the day,” he said. “I try to be innovative in terms of finish, hardware and veneer treatments but keep true to the design theme. If you’re doing a Chippendale or Charles X collection, it has a certain look or flair, but you might use a new format for the doors and drawers. Each manufacturer can do that. It’s not necessary for people to knock off a French Country, Louis Philippe or Shaker group.”

Shangle has no doubt that collections based on historical styles inspire goods from other manufacturers that qualify as knockoffs.

“It goes back to the source of original inspiration,” Shangle said. “Thomas Chippendale, for example, was a fabulous designer, but he never designed a console for a flat-screen television. That style can be adopted into a new interpretation for the market today. A knockoff of that piece doesn’t have that resonance. It has the ability to reproduce the intent of the original design, but not the soul of it.

“Collections based on historical styles do get knocked off,” Shangle added. “Someone might say, ‘If I need a Chippendale console to round out a collection, all I do is model it after someone else’s.’”

Even in the case of a historical style, though, one collection doesn’t have to be a dead ringer of another to be a knockoff in Coley’s eyes.

“When it’s confusingly similar to an existing collection for the person out there buying a piece of furniture, I think it’s a knockoff,” Coley said. “If drawer configurations have similar if not the same moldings, a similar if not the same foot, it’s confusing to the consumer. It doesn’t have to be exactly the same, but a similar finish or hardware location. But that’s not something you can take to court.”

WHAT’S THE RECOURSE?

One problem with knockoffs is the sheer expense involved in litigating such cases.

“The problem is it’s very expensive to defend your rights,” Coley noted. “Your patents have to be good, and even then they’re pretty hard to defend, and when you can defend them it’s very expensive. Beyond a cease-and-desist letter from their attorney, companies tend not to defend their patents and designs.”

Shangle has spent his share of time in court and with attorneys as an expert witness, and he said pursuing a knockoff all the way through court can easily run to $1 million.

“The law doesn’t favor one side or another,” he said. “What it does is favor the (legal) process. ... Designs are as well-protected as we can ask them to be from an aesthetic standpoint. In a very broad, generic sense, a lot of collections look alike, and they look like things from the past. It’s a question of to what degree they look alike, and to what level were the elements combined?

“To defend that (design) is very, very expensive, as is defending yourself against an accusation, particularly if you’re a freelance furniture designer. Not only is your current product suspect in the eyes of the manufacturers, so is everything else you’ve ever done.”

There’s also more settled out of court than what meets the eye.

“If I’m a freelance furniture designer and I’m looking at between $500,000 and $1 million—those are very real numbers—or if I’m a manufacturer of a successful collection and I’m going to sue to protect it, can I afford to do so?” Shangle said.

MAKING THE CALL

The Kendall College’s furniture design curriculum includes an examination of knockoffs and what designers can do to better protect their designs, and also avoid copying someone else’s.

“We have in-depth class discussions of the consequences knockoffs have for the industry. Knockoffs don’t do anyone any good expect for the person doing it,” Shangle said. “From a design standpoint, we look at what to do and how to protect. What are the extreme costs if you are knocked off? Documenting, dating work, keeping good records, using original source inspiration helps. The first question is, how do you know your work was first?”

Aesthetic patents are very difficult to acquire versus functional patents, but there are ways to work protectable function into the design.

“If I take an original footstool and it becomes a dining room table, and I can prove that it hasn’t been used that way before, I can defend it,” Shangle said by way of example.

Eventually, though, it boils down to a money question.

“If I defend this design, and it has a three-year life, and I have two years left with it, is it worth litigation?” Shangle said. “The reason companies sue for design infringement is to slow down the process of that (infringing) product challenging their product in the marketplace through a cease and desist order.”

Such orders can be issued before a final judgment and set up at least a temporary roadblock to sales of the alleged knockoff merchandise.

“That’s often the goal, since in terms of the money spent, it’s considerably cheaper—maybe $100,000. If that order stops or slows down the knockoff in the marketplace, that’s important,” Shangle said.

Sometimes, though, it’s necessary to carry litigation through its full course.

“If you’re talking about a significant signature brand, when people see a particular product as that company, the manufacturer almost has a duty to defend its own brand,” Shangle said.

Faber believes in using Century’s own manufacturing capabilities to ensure a unique product.

“Better veneers, better finishes and better hardware—that’s what makes it unique to your company and sets it above the competition,” he said. “I look at it a little differently—I think a knockoff is a form of flattery. If we are knocked off cold, you’re a little shocked. My thought is the first one one there in the marketplace is always the best.”

Keeping Between the Lines

June 30, 2008   by in UnCategorized   

By Home Furnishings Business in Furniture Retailing on July 2008 More retailers are exploring the market-worthiness of developing their own in-store furniture labels these days. While the strategy builds on a longtime industry mantra that “the store is the brand,” private labeling has its challenges.

Obviously, the quality has to fit the expectations shoppers have for a particular store, and the goods must meet marketplace demands. The latter issue dictates that retailers taking the private-label route create looks with plenty of appeal that stand apart from what’s already out there—i.e., styles that sell, but don’t knock off what’s already in the marketplace.

Once an issue of concern mainly for vendors’ product development teams, avoiding infringing product now affects those retailers looking to create their own lines.

Most of the retailers contacted for this article wouldn’t even touch the subject (note to self: Don’t mention “knockoff” and “private label” in the same sentence when leaving messages and expect a lot of call-backs) but one that did, Atlanta-based Havertys, is perhaps the largest “traditional” furniture retailer concentrating on its own brand, making a major commitment to differentiating itself through private-label goods at its more than 120 stores in 17 states.

“I sold my first piece of Havertys-branded product in February 2000,” said Tony Wilkerson, executive vice president of merchandising. Since then, private-label goods have grown at Havertys to take a huge portion of all categories except bedding.

“With minimal exceptions, everything in our lineup is Havertys brand. ... Other lines are in single digits as a percentage. That does not include bedding, where we still carry national brands.”

HOEING YOUR OWN ROW

Havertys hasn’t run across any knockoff problems with any of its branded product, Wilkerson said. He credited a strong creative process between the furniture designers and the retailer’s merchandising team.

“We’re looking to brand something that everyone else isn’t carrying,” he said. “When you see a strong seller in the marketplace, there are generally very few key design elements. It could be the styling, wood or fabric combination in upholstery.

“We work directly with designers and give them elements we want in the product, and have them work with our merchandising team. If you see an element you like, you take it and figure out how to use it in a different way. Sometimes it turns into a new element. You need to address that customer who might be looking for a traditional poster bed.”

Havertys also is looking into registering many of its designs to protect the retailer from—get this—being knocked off by vendors or other retailers.

“You can’t nail down everything, but certain elements can be registered,” Wilkerson said. “You do have suppliers where their business is predicated on making lower-cost versions of product that’s in the marketplace. More companies are trying to protect what they have out there, and the more companies that do that, the better it is for the industry.”

KNOCKOFFS HURT RETAILERS

In the end, Wilkerson believed retailers carrying knockoffs that are lower priced than the originals can end up hurting themselves as much as anyone else. He questioned whether retailers can actually make money that way.

“A lot of retailers who followed that business model ended up in the bone yard,” Wilkerson said. “Say you have a $599 sofa, and an identical one comes out next Market at $499. Are you going to cannibalize yourself at less margin?

“You can carry excellent designs and still offer an outstanding value to the customer,” he added. “You don’t have to offer the same thing the guy down the street has and sell it for less. Consumers are smart enough to see value when it’s there.”



Finding Out More

Following is a list of some possible sources of insight into the issue of private labels. The list includes books, Web sites, Web logs and publications with a focus on private labeling, as well as commentary on branding and knockoffs. They cast a far-wider net than the furniture industry, but readers might be able to find out how other sectors have been affected by knockoffs and what they’ve done about them.

• The Psychology Behind Trademark Infringement and Counterfeiting by Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky.

Zaichkowsky writes about how new product developers need to consider the possibility of brand imitation. She looks to provide readers with ways to create differentiated, protectable product.

Available on amazon.com.

• brandchannel.com

Online exchange about branding. Offers tools and information including global listings for conferences, courses and careers, and links to other industry resources. Also features open exchange on the subjects of brands and branding from practitioners around the world through features such as online debates and white paper submissions.

• brandweek.com

Online extension of Brandweek magazine. Breaking marketing industry news and analysis, and commentary that puts that news into perspective.

• privatelabelmag.com

Web site for Private Label Magazine, which has been publishing since 1979 and targets manufacturers, buyers and retailers in various industries with information on private branding trends in a variety of product categories.

• blogcatalog.com

Check here with the search “private label” for a large number of blogs on the topic of private branding.

• privatelabelbuyer.com

Web site devoted to private label retailing. It includes information on merchandising and marketing private label products through in-depth features on leading retail chains, up-close category analysis and a focus on industry trends, all designed to help maximize quality and profitability in private label programs.

PL Buyer is a monthly printed magazine.

• counterfeitchic.com

A blog from Fordham law professor Susan Scafidi. The site focuses on fashion, an industry long troubled by knockoffs. Scafidi offers a course in fashion law, and has testified in Congress on fashion infringement law. In addition to plenty of commentary and information, the site also includes legal links.

The Regional Consumer

June 30, 2008   by in UnCategorized   

By Home Furnishings Business in Furniture Retailing on July 2008 In this issue of Home Furnishings Business, we take our final look at our Consumer Survey. Due to the rapidly changing economy, we re-questioned our original consumer panel about what is happening in their region of the economy and what is most affecting them and their ability to purchase home furnishings.

The first thing to note is that consumer responses don’t vary that much by region, but if you’re planning on selling to people in your area, you need to understand what motivates them and what leaves them cold.

Of all the consumers surveyed, those in the Northeast may be the toughest sell and the hardest to get back in home furnishings stores. Fully 45 percent of those surveyed said they hadn’t shopped for home furnishings in at least two years, with more than half of them saying it had been more than five years since they shopped for home goods.

Of course, this may mean that their inner decorator is about to burst out of her shell and good furniture and great buying terms will entice her to shop like never before.

Just 3 percent of Northeasterners had shopped for home furnishings in the past six months, compared with 9 percent in the South and 7 percent in the Midwest and West regions. But in all four regions, more than two-fifths of respondents said it had been between one and two years since they had shopped for home furnishings.

These are the consumers who may provide the best opportunity to increase sales or sell enough to match last year’s total store sales. It hasn’t been that long since they shopped that they aren’t aware of what styles and trends are fashionable and, hopefully, they have pleasant memories of their last purchase.

Designing a marketing program around these recent shoppers, including product, delivery and financing, may get those shoppers back in the store, along with their more reluctant neighbors.

And this plan also recognizes the two things that consumers say are most likely to get them back shopping—good quality furniture and a great sale. Savvy shopkeepers know that the best way to get buyers to buy is to first get them in the store. Then let your trained, expert salespeople do what they do best—match customer needs and wants with what your store offers.

HUNGRY FOR PRODUCT

Across the board in all regions, consumers plan to buy home entertainment furnishings next. Spurred by the U.S. switch to all-digital TV broadcasts in February next year, consumers are setting their sights on televisions that can receive the government-mandated signals and want furniture to put those televisions in and on.

About two-thirds of consumers in each region said home entertainment furniture was next on their shopping lists, followed by a sofa, upholstered chair and then bedding.

Not surprisingly, each of the next products on the want-list can be used to watch that new digital television, a clear indication, if one was needed, that consumers are responding to the digital age and designing their homes around what’s new, hot and works.

In terms of home accessories, lamps/lighting and wall art top the list of consumer wish lists, with about 60 percent of customers naming these products as need-to-buys. Next come home textiles, including such items as bedding (the sheets and pillowcases, not the mattress and bedsprings), bathroom textiles, window treatments and kitchen/dining textiles.

Pretty far down the consumer wish-list are accent furniture, tabletop products and candles. But this is a list of planned purchases, not the impulse buys that are so attractive to customers once they actually enter a store. These “add-ons” can frequently add up to sizable tickets and according to one Westerner, they “make” her house. Look for store managers and owners to keep her and her wise sisters in mind when it comes to stocking their stores.

AND THE MONEY COMES FROM?

A quick check of consumers done in May showed that survey respondents think the same way as last year about how they will pay for their home furnishings purchases—they’ll finance them.

Despite the drastically tightened credit market, just 6 percent of Northeasterners and Southerners plan to pay by cash or check for their new home furnishings purchases, with 8 percent of Midwesterners and 7 percent of Westerners making the same choice.

Overall, about seven out of 10 consumers plan to use store credit to finance that new entertainment center or sofa, so it’s past time for store managers and owners to make sure that they have access to finance companies with consumer-friendly financing plans. The question is not whether or not consumers want to finance their new product; it’s whether they can qualify for financing at all!

STEPPING OUT AND STEPPING ON

Just as you see on those home-decorating shows on television, home-dwellers love hardwood floors, with more than 40 percent of consumers in the survey preferring them to carpets, tile/slate, rugs, linoleum and other floor coverings. In the West and Northeast, 44 percent of consumers wanted hardwood floors in the homes, with the South coming in at 43 percent and the Midwest at 40 percent.

But wanting hardwood floors and having them in the home are two different things. If consumers can’t afford hardwood floors, they are likely to want to dress up their homes with other less-expensive flooring products. Another opportunity for store managers and owners is offering rugs to those who already have hardwood floors.

Hardwood floors can easily be scratched or damaged, and consumers may be looking for ways to protect their floors and also give the room another design element—a rug.

IT’S A TOUGH, TOUGH WORLD OUT THERE

Six months ago, when Home Furnishings Business first surveyed consumers, people were more optimistic about the economy than they appear to be at present. To verify, Home Furnishings Business went back to those original consumers and re-surveyed them on a number of economic questions.

In the original survey, just 29 percent of consumers said that gas was either already at $4 a gallon in their area or would reach that level. In May, a whopping 90 percent said $4 gas was a reality or would be in their area in the near future. Regionally, the most expensive fuel region in the U.S. appears to be the West, where 93 percent of those surveyed said $4 gas was there or was coming soon.

A similar response was received on the question of a recession. Six months ago, on average, just 13 percent of consumers said the country was in a recession. Now, an average of 69 percent says it’s in a recession, with consumers in the Midwest most pessimistic (or realistic!), coming in at 83 percent, followed by the West at 79 percent.

Just over half—51 percent—of consumers in the South say the country is in a recession, but a nearly equal number, 47 percent, say a recession is probably coming later this year.

Car-buying plans for this year have been pretty much shelved, according to consumers. Just 4 percent said six months ago they planned to buy a car; now, the number is 3 percent.

The number of consumers planning a vacation this year increased from 20 percent six months ago to 30 percent in May. However, the number planning on staying home for that vacation and not traveling doubled. The most-often cited reason for not traveling? The cost of gas, of course.

At 33 percent, Midwesterners are most likely to take a vacation this year, followed by the Northeast and South at 29 percent and the West at 26 percent.

A trip to the grocery store has become a sore subject with many consumers, as prices continue to rise. Milk, eggs, flour, meat and other products have seen double-digit percentage increases in recent months.

Six months ago, 52 percent of consumers said groceries bills were either higher or a lot higher compared to a year earlier. In May, that number jumped to 71 percent of consumers. Nearly eight out of 10 of Midwesterners said prices had skyrocketed, compared with 66 percent in the West.

THE SOLUTION?

There are no easy solutions for how to get consumers into home furnishings stores and how to get them to buy. But consumer spending numbers on home furnishings are going up from month to month, showing that consumers are buying.

In April, consumers bought $418.4 billion of home furnishings, up 1 percent from March. Compared with April of 2007, spending increased 1.5 percent.

If store managers and owners haven’t done it yet, now is the time to hone that marketing plan, make sure salespeople know their jobs and products, and go after customers.

From October 2007 until February 2008, Home Furnishings Business conducted an exclusive survey of consumers on the furnishings industry, including what products they purchased, where they shopped, their shopping experience and their future shopping plans. More than 400 consumers were surveyed on a wide range of questions.

In May of 2008, consumers that responded to the original survey were re-questioned about the economy in their area and how it is affecting them.

The survey was originated, conducted and compiled by Research Editor Janice Chamberlain under the guidance of Editor in Chief Sheila Long O’Mara.

What’s In a Name? Does Consumers Care?

June 30, 2008   by in UnCategorized   

By Home Furnishings Business in on July 2008 In a survey of more than 400 consumers in May, Home Furnishings Business asked what they knew about store brand versus “name” brand furniture and whether or not or how this factored into buying decisions.

For the purposes of this survey, store brands, also known as house brands, were defined as collections or single pieces of furniture over which the store had final design, production, pricing, delivery and other decision-making responsibilities and control whether or not they delegated some of those responsibilities to other companies. Store brands are only available at the store that contracted for the product and have a name unique to that store.

Name brands are those pieces of furniture designed, produced and delivered to the store by a single producer/vendor. Name brands are widely available, often through a variety of channels, are generally not exclusive to one store and often have name recognition value with consumers. Name brands in the industry include Ethan Allen and La-Z-Boy and the “S” bedding brands.

For years, furniture industry analysts have cited the lack of name brand recognition as a major concern within the industry. While most consumers recognize the names of La-Z-Boy or Ethan Allen, many other producers/vendors are not as well known. Unlike the automobile industry, where consumers recognize the names of Chevrolet, Ford, Toyota, Honda and others, and have an opinion about those brands, furniture consumers usually don’t have a fixed opinion on name brand furniture simply because they don’t recognize name brands.

Fewer than half—43 percent—of consumers surveyed said they thought they had purchased a store brand furniture product in the past, while six out of 10 thought they had previously purchased a piece of name-brand furniture. Generally speaking, they were unsure about what kind of furniture they had.

According to one Western shopper, “I don’t care what name is on my sofa as long as it’s what I want. I want the store I bought it at to stand behind it and that’s all I really care about.”

However, generically speaking, consumers did think there were differences between the two groups of furniture. Consumers gave name brand furniture higher scores when it came to quality, a wider selection of product, more name brands available and more fabric/coverings choices for upholstered product.

On the other hand, consumers thought store brand furniture products had better prices, were more stylish and were delivered more quickly.

But there are clear-cut cases where a name brand has strong pulling power, particularly when it comes to bedding. Nearly three-quarters of consumers said they were more likely to buy name brand bedding.

One Southerner summed it up: “I’ve heard a lot about the brand of bedding I bought and I associate quality and comfort with that name. Getting a good night’s sleep is very important to me and I trust this company because they’ve put a lot of research into their product.”

Recliners also had brand name appeal. One product with surprising name brand recognition was ready-to-assemble furniture. One middle-aged Midwesterner explained that choice: “When I got my first job, all I could afford was the kind of furniture that came in a box and you had to put it together yourself.

“You don’t want to have to take it apart and lug it back to the store if it isn’t right. When you don’t have much money and certainly none to waste, you learn very quickly what brands are worth buying and which aren’t,” he added.

So how do consumers make choices between name brand and store brand furniture? It’s all on who you know.

Consumers are more than five times more likely to trust a salesperson than their own judgment when choosing between a name brand and a store brand. The only more trusted opinion comes from family members and friends.

When it came to buying upholstery, 21 percent of consumers said the buying decision was made due to the fabrics or coverings offered, particularly if the product styles were similar.

What it comes down to is that the buying decision is unique to each customer. What is essential to one is meaningless to another. Consumers want choices, and that includes choices between name brands and store brands.

From October 2007 until February 2008, Home Furnishings Business conducted an exclusive survey of consumers on the furnishings industry, including what products they purchased, where they shopped, their shopping experience and their future shopping plans. More than 400 consumers were surveyed on a wide range of questions and the results of the survey were published in prior issues of HFB.

In May of 2008, consumers who responded to the original survey were re-questioned about the economy in their area and how they viewed “name” branded furniture versus store branded furniture.

The surveys were originated, conducted and compiled by Research Editor Janice Chamberlain under the guidance of Editor in Chief Sheila Long O’Mara.

It’s Only Rock and Roll

June 30, 2008   by in UnCategorized   

By Home Furnishings Business in on July 2008 Furniture design for the mainstream market sometimes reminds me of rock and roll music. The songs I grew up listening to generally were built around a set of familiar chord progressions culled from the blues masters of the early and middle 20th century.

While the basics they used were similar, sometimes even identical, musicians managed to get a wide variety of sounds out of those old, reliable structures. Likewise, for most of the furniture I see at markets, there really is nothing incredibly new. In furniture as in rock, it’s the recombinations and fresh takes that make the difference, and when I shop, I don’t feel slighted by the options I see—our industry often gets accused of providing consumers with a “sea of brown,” but I’ve always found enough variety to suit my preferences.

Here’s another similarity—knockoffs. While rock musicians and furniture vendors both tend to draw from respective common wells of inspiration, sometimes the similarity ends up too much to bear for another band in rock’s case, or a competing vendor in furniture’s.

Some of the events in our industry that are discussed in this issue got me thinking back on some musical dust-ups from years past.

I suppose the most famous knockoff case in rock and roll was in 1976 when former Beatle George Harrison had to give up royalties on his 1971 song “My Sweet Lord” after a judge ruled him guilty of “unconscious plagiarism” of The Chiffons’ “He’s So Fine” from 1963. For his part, Harrison claimed he’d been inspired by the Edwin Hawkins Singers’ “Oh Happy Day.” Go figure.

In 1985, Ray Parker Jr. had to settle out of court with Huey Lewis & the News after Parker’s theme song to “Ghostbusters” drew Huey and company’s ire over similarities to their own hit song “I Want a New Drug.” (How those guys could claim sole ownership of most of their hooks leaves me baffled.)

For years now, “sampling”—i.e. incorporating actual parts of songs, generally rock songs, into a track—has been standard operating procedure among some hip-hop artists. I remember the kick I got watching “Saturday Night Live” in 1991 when Dennis Miller’s “Weekend Update” segment led in with a snippet of “Under Pressure” from Queen and David Bowie—just after Vanilla Ice performed “Ice Ice Baby,” which sampled from the earlier song. Miller mused about how much he loved the Bowie/Queen collaboration and how great it would be if someone made another song with it.

And, like rock and roll, the furniture industry has seen its share of lemming-like behavior. I remember back around 10 years or so ago when my mentor at Furniture/Today, Brian Carroll, and I were prowling premarket showrooms in High Point. It was the season after Stanley had introduced a blond maple “lifestyle” collection with nickel hardware.

It seemed that in every showroom we entered, our hosts would say, “And here (insert drumroll) is our new collection.” We thought we were in a “Groundhog Day” of light-finish casual contemporary bedroom and dining room, and brushed metal hardware.

I call it furniture’s “Disco Era.” While the goods looked nice and weren’t so groan-inducing as disco music from the likes of Rod Stewart or the Rolling Stones, it was a little depressing to see that level of sameness in our industry.

In conclusion, I’d like to pose this question. Why the heck didn’t Foghat ever sue Aero-smith? Anyone here ever listen to “Honey Hush” and “Train Kept a Rollin’” back to back? No, wait a minute—both songs are covers of records from the 1950s. I’m confused.

Thanks for your time.