Top 100 Awards-Congrats

Create a Post
L

lyoncat

CGF II, Certified Grumble Framer Level 2
Joined
Sep 19, 2001
Posts
456
Loc
N.Franklin,CT USA
Congratulations to all the winners in the Top 100 Art & Framing Retailers Awards.

I see John Raines and his wife, Sarah, in the list of my new Decor magazine. Great job guys! Have not spotted anyone else yet, but I am sure there must be more of you in there from TG. I am not familiar with everyone's real name, or their shop names, but please step forward for your kudo's.

I will go back to reading now, so much info to be had from the articles.
(Glad to see Meg Peters in their too. I read her articles, and she seems very bright.)
 
Hey Lyon-I finally got my Decor today and wasn't as impressed as you were. I read the first three or four profiles and kept thinking of that Wendy's ad campaign a few years ago. You know, "Where's the Beef"? I mean Congrats to the winners. They entered (they did more than we did ) and they won. But what did they do that merits Excellence?

I don't mean to be picking on these people because it certainly could be that the articles weren't very well written to describe what and how they did what they did.

I was hoping to see some inspired success stories with some real meat to them. I haven't finished all of them, but the first stories were a little less compelling than I had hoped
 
I kinda sorta agree with Bob up to a point (nuthin' wishy washy about my thinking!!).

The competition is the first attempt by DECOR to do this and they received only 235 entries to choose 100 winners from. Those are real good odds that an average shop would place in the top 100 just for entering the contest. I am sure that this was expected for the first year.

I commend those who placed in the top 100 and I hope that DECOR will continue this award in years to come. It can't do anything but get better as more and more shops decide to vie for that top 100 classification.

I didn't catch what the awards consisted of but, if DECOR gives equipment or materials or even a nice plaque for the winners, they should get a nice number of entries in the future.

Framerguy
 
I haven't read them all yet, but like Bob said, they did take the time to enter.

It's only storefront businesses though. That leaves out Nona, Me, Cathie, and several others who might have wanted to enter. :(

Betty
 
Well, geez Betty. They have to draw the line somewhere or they'd be getting entries from just any old body - like me, for instance.

Kit
 
I'm a little confused about the "Most Profitable" categories. In the Under 300K category is says "For 2002, the gallery...grossed $65.86 per square foot (based on 675 square feet)." According to my calculator that comes out to $44,455.50. I can't possibly imagine that amount is per year (and still be "the most profitable"), yet if it were per month it would be well over the 300k per year.

The over 300K category uses similar terminology (based on 1150 SF) "...with sales ringing up over $104 per square foot". That's only $119,600.00, so .....

Are these typos, and the numbers refer to profit per square foot? If not, could we have an explanation on what the numbers do mean, and what "profitable" means (John Taff?).

[ 08-27-2003, 09:20 AM: Message edited by: David N Waldmann ]
 
Hey David-I agree completely. What I don't know is if the person putting together the profiles simply doesn't understand the numbers (likely)or if the pool of contestants was so small that this was the most profitable (also likely).

But, what was absolutely missing was the how they did it and what can the rest of us learn from it. One similarity in most of the profiles I read were very new businesses (where growth should be exponential).

It's not very gracious of us to pick this brand new contest apart, yet if it were more informative, it would certainly be of more value.

My unfortunate take was that this was another example in our trade where we lower the bar for Excellence in Retailing. Most of the numbers are so small to be viewed as "statistically invalid" from an Excellence point. I haven't finished reading all the articles and am not disparaging those that contributed. But, if the race were between a Hyundai and a Yugo, I'm not sure the term Excellence in Automotive would be proper.

My favorite was the Footsteps Award. The client base was raised from a little over 300 in year 2 (about one client a day) to a little over 600 in year 3 (or about two clients a day). I'm not sure if that represents a need to replace the carpeting anytime soon.

We ought to absolutely recognize the effort of these retailers. They are growing their businesses nicely. But without any meaningful information, I guess I'll reserve my judgement on Excellence.

To be fair, we did not enter this contest because our year last year was nowhere near Excellence. After 20 yrs, it's hard to double numbers like the new kids.

My award to Excellence would go to John Ranes. We visit and share information, so I hope this isn't telling tales out of school. But last year at Christmas, he did more business in December than the under $300k winner did in year 2 and 3 combined, primarily because of his gift line.

That's my idea of Retailing Excellence.
 
Originally posted by Bob Carter:

But, what was absolutely missing was the how they did it and what can the rest of us learn from it.
Click to expand...
That's what I enjoy so much about the business magazines such as INC, Fast Company, and Entrepreneur. They not only tell how well (or how badly) a company is doing, but just how they did, or didn't do something.

If you're not reading anything other than your own industry's material, you're really missing out.

Betty
 
Hi,

Well you all have some valid points. As this award is brand new to the industry, there are aspects of it that will evolve--including, hopefully, the number and expertise of the entrants. This doesn't detract at all from the current winners, though, as each of them had good stories to tell.

And 235 entries for a first-year contest in an industry that isn't too keen on participation at nearly every level, I think, is a success.

Those who didn't enter, for whatever reason, I would hope wouldn't sit on the sidelines and nitpick but rather take this as an impetus for entering next year.

Now, the only thing I'd take real umbrage with is the fact that the editors either didn't understand the numbers (not) or didn't write the pieces well (not). Based on the constraints of space for the issue--and the proprietary P&Ls companies shared with us--we certainly laid out reasons why each company was selected for each award--reasonably, succinctly and specifically. There wasn't a whole lot of room to go into detail. We may feature each winner in separate stories throughout the year to go into more depth. But I think the articles gave the main points.

As far as profitability goes, our goal was to generate a profit-per-square-foot number. That way, we believed, a smaller shop could compete somewhat evenly with a larger shop. If we didn't make this clear in the articles, we'll do a better job of that next time.

All in all, I'm begging you guys to let us get this off the ground. This industry desperately needs a professional awards program to recognize the "best," and the only way one is going to succeed is if important audiences like the Grumblers support it. Help us by entering your stores next year.

John
 
Originally posted by johntaff:
As far as profitability goes, our goal was to generate a profit-per-square-foot number.
Click to expand...
So "grossed $65.86 per square foot" and "sales ringing up over $104 per square foot" are both referring to gross profit. That makes a little more cents even if the terminology is a bit confusing.

I understand the limitations of publishing the methods of determining these numbers. One thing I'd like to point out is that especially in the Under 300K category the organization of the comapany can make a huge difference in the "profitablility" of a company. Namely whether it's a sole proprietorship where the "profit" is the owners' wages, or a corporation where the owner(s) are paid an expensable salary. I would expect that would be taken into account by including owners compensation as profit, but the reason I even bring it up is because $45,000 doesn't seem like it's enough total income for "the most profitable under 300k frame shop in America" (tongue in cheek - sorry, could help myself). On the other hand, if it is profit beyond owners compensation, it means nothing because you don't know what the owners compensation is.

I don't mean to come down too hard on what is obviously a great idea and a lot of work to produce. And I do tip my hat to all those that took the time to apply, and most especially those that received the recognition. I'm just a details person and am probably a bit more picky than many.
 
I would love to have seen more in-depth articles about how and why's, but I am also supportive of this activity. I forget how long it has been, and maybe John or someone else recalls, the old "Award of Excellence" program that Decor did in the early 90's. As a newbie, I used to dream of how nice it would be to have that trophy in my shop someday. It was something to strive for.

I do hope there are many more involved next year, and really give everyone a run for their money.
 
David,

No, you're not more picky. I'm sure we probably could have explained it better! Live and learn. Like so many things, it'll be better next year!

John
 
Hi John-I don't Dave is being picky at all. If the nomenclature should have been Gross Profit Dollars, then you should have said so. I have to be honest and say I have never heard anyone use it in that context.

For simplicity and clarity might I constructively recommend:

Sales for prior year:
Sales for current year:
Cost of Goods PY:
Cost of Goods CY:
Number of years in Business:

Then we can look at those numbers objectively and see for ourselves where progress was made. Obviously, a business that has been in business for 2 or 3 years should show exponential growth in those years, so maybe a category for businesses over 5 years might be something to consider.

But, if we knew that a business was fairly new and year one they did less than $100k, and year two they did $150k is that growth any more excellent that than a company thats a little more mature that goes from $500k to $550k? From a percentage basis, no. From a dollar basis, yes.

You took umbrage because we couldn't understand the numbers. John, be glad we took the time to look at the numbers. The fact that they weren't clear isn't a reader problem and if the writers truly understood those numbers, they did a poor job in communicating. And that's not a problem with the contest.

You mentioned the need for privacy on propriatary P/L's. That's what sq ft ratios are all about (although anyone with a little ability can probably extrapolate some meaningful numbers). I have heard of sales/sq ft, profit/sq ft, but I have never seen it run backwards as a gross profit/sq ft. Like David brings up, those numbers are so easily manipulated. If I took my compensation out of our P/L's, it would give an Enron-type false reading of the health of our company.

If we stick to commonly-applied Accounting Principles, we can all better understand the numbers.

The one thing to take pride in is that everyone likes the concepts and no one is trying to belittle any winners. There is something to work on, huh?

Do you think we will finallyget a chance to hook up in Atlanta this year? The past three years have been, we've been like ships passing in the night
 
I know (and I think John will confirm) that this awards program started off very slow. Both Decor and Tru Vue were out begging shops to sign up and I even contributed some names that I thought they should go after. The most difficult thing is the numbers...no one wants to give up numbers. Do they know? I think the good business people do but a vast majority really don't. So can the numbers be fudged, you bet. John and his staff are not the IRS. I can't even get customers for the most part even tell me what they buy from us in a year let alone what they pay for a case of glass. Most of the time they won't even show a sales person an invoice. (Sorry - another subject). None the less (even though less is here) I think it's great and even though the entry number was small all the more power to those that entered and congrats!

[ 08-27-2003, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: John Richards ]
 
I know (and I think John will confirm) that this awards program started off very slow.

Gee . . . I wonder why. . . ?

Both Decor and Tru Vue were out begging shops to sign up and I even contributed some names that I thought they should go after.

Oh, yeah, that’s the ticket. Let’s have the suppliers decide who kicks *** and who doesn’t. Heh, heh. No conflict of interest there.

The most difficult thing is the numbers...no one wants to give up numbers.

So . . . give us your ******* numbers. Maybe then we, as non-chain, non-franchise, independent retailers, can have a better handle on the suppliers we want to do business with in the long term. I mean, gee . . . I really do want to know how the whole distributor sector (small, medium –like your company and your peers) stacks up against the bigger guys. That info has got to help me in terms of buying leverage when it comes to my pricing model.

Do they know? I think the good business people do but a vast majority really don't.

I couldn’t agree with you more on this point. Rock on.

So can the numbers be fudged, you bet. John and his staff are not the IRS.

Duh. No ****.

I can't even get customers for the most part even tell me what they buy from us in a year let alone what they pay for a case of glass.

Wow. Very freaking scarey! (Except, of course, if there are art & framing retailers in your primary trade area that are actually interested in making some serious money in that same trade area). But, hey, maybe those guys don’t do business with you.

Most of the time they won't even show a sales person an invoice. (Sorry - another subject).

Surely you don’t mean a competitor’s invoice. Nah. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.

I think it's great and even though the entry number was small all the more power to those that entered and congrats!

Right On!

[ 08-29-2003, 08:04 AM: Message edited by: Ron Eggers ]
 
I have to say, I never once doubted the intentions of Decor to protect critical information. And I can't imagine any vendor gleaning valuables nuggets, either.

I think this was well-intentioned and we need to congratulate those that took the time to offer their entries. Perhaps, as John indicated, they will do a more in-depth profiles of some of the winners so we might learn what it took for them to achieve what they achieve.

But, I don't think there is a sinister movement afoot by anyone. I think it is a sincere offer.

As an aside, I think it is highly appropriate for a vendor to require some proof from a potential client to confirm extreme pricing. I wouldn't do it if I was uncomfortable with a vendor I was negotiating with; but, I wouldn't be negotiating with any vendor I was uncomfortable with. When pricing comes up (and it does) and I say I pay a below market price for an item and the vendor is willing to beat it, and I want to do business with this vendor, you can bet I'll provide that documentation.

A good vendor/client relationship shouldn't be adversarial. It should be cooperative.

Back to the contest....
 
MAX: Here's some answers!


The most difficult thing is the numbers...no one wants to give up numbers.

So . . . give us your ******* numbers. Maybe then we, as non-chain, non-franchise, independent retailers, can have a better handle on the suppliers we want to do business with in the long term. I mean, gee . . . I really do want to know how the whole distributor sector (small, medium –like your company and your peers) stacks up against the bigger guys. That info has got to help me in terms of buying leverage when it comes to my pricing model.

My ******* numbers are going to close to 8.5 million this year between two distribution centers covering 8 states and about 3700 customers buying over $1,200.00 per year. Your turn.

Most of the time they won't even show a sales person an invoice. (Sorry - another subject).

Surely you don’t mean a competitor’s invoice. Nah. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Yes I do mean a competitior's invoice. And thanks Bob you hit the nail right on the head. We get into bidding situations on commodity products all the time. LJ for example will tinker with their programs and even though our published price matches theirs and our program discounts match theirs some how we end of a few percentage points higher. I wonder how that happens. We sometimes get customers that will promise all of their mats or all the glass or all the foam depending on price. We used to just ask for the yearly volume and set our bid appropriately. We would be told that we had the business yet the customer still would not buy. That's why we now ask for an invoice and then we know where we have to be. Those that are truly interested in saving money and building partnerships shouldn't have a problem being honest with what they are paying. Proof is in the pudding as they say.
 
Just as an aside here, everyone should understand that suppliers didn't nominate or complete applications for anyone. Nor did they participate in the qualifying or judging procedures. And this includes anyone at Tru Vue. We might have urged, begged and twisted arms to get people to enter, but ultimately it was the retailer who entered, not the supplier.

John
 
Thanks John. I probably should have been a little clearer in that you contacted some distributors to suggest which customers may be deserving of such honors and that they were sent applications. I really think this was a good thing, distributors should know who is deserving award.
 
John, that strikes me as a little strange. My store was nominated by a supplier. I never found out about it until a lady from Decor Magazine called and told me my store had been nominated. She interviewed me over the phone and said the winners would be announced in Decor.

Fortunately, for the image of our industry, my store was not among the winners. No wait...., It was a dark day indeed, for the image of our industry, that my store was not among the winners.

I was never told that I would have to make the entry myself. Decor told me that the entry had been made.

John
 
John, thats exactly the same as what happened here. They said I was nominated by one of my suppliers and asked a few odd questions. I don't remember the questions I was asked now but seems to me I remmeber thinking later, strange, only asked a few questions and if that is what the awards were based on they must really be disparate for contestants.

[ 09-02-2003, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: wcox ]
 
Create a Post
Back
Top