Every place with a thriving business has its
roots deep into history. And in the case of fabrics and other fashion trends as
handicrafts, they tend to have an emotional connection with the producers and
the local people.
The
hook:
Handloom and other cottage produces are labour
intensive activities. With inclusion of sourcing the best of materials and
keeping up with the demand the toll on the producers is quite high. For the
buyers, the intrinsic attachment to the products being their exclusivity, uniqueness
and most importantly the human touch. The other aspect for the buyer being the ‘bragging
rights’ of having one, just like the ownership of a luxury brand in some cases.
The
line:
Difficult accessibility to raw materials and
labour intensity tends to a high pricing of the products. But historically,
handloom has been the shopping preference for the middle class of the society. With
inflation the acquiring of handloom becomes harder for that particular class. However,
the aspiration to have them never fades away.
This is the point where low cost produces come
to play. The methodology employed being mechanization, adulteration or
adjustment of raw materials and finally the glitz to sparkle eyeballs.
As a result of the above actions the demand
supply chain is normalized, the flaws acquired in handmade products are to an
extent removed and the oomph being added by means of adoption of latest fashion
trends and adopting them into these products.
The sinker:
The newer practices however hurt the income of
the handloom workers. And also bring down the exclusivity of their produce. Due
to reduced costs, the products are not always expected to have the quality as
in handloom, however failure in performance directs the ire of the buyer toward
the local producer rather the one mass producing. With customer satisfaction going down high
priced products take the beating. Thereby affecting he whole community
economically as well as culturally.
Perceived solution:
Local produces could get geographical indicators
and also restriction of manufacture of those produces by any other agency with
provisions of punishment inducing deterrence in involvement in such activity. Total
ban on sale of he products other than by the partners endorsed by the geographical
indicator. And last but importantly, creating attraction towards the produce of
handloom by local people and increase in number of the workers thereby bridging
the gap of supply and demand.
As a suggestion, I would like to ask all readers
and experts in such fields that is grading of products possible wherein the
same product varying in minor qualities be graded such as to offer them in a wide
band of prices and make them available to all masses?? Leave your comments
Pardon me first if I am anywhere factually wrong with north east scenario.
ReplyDeleteLet us look at the issues first
1. local artisan angry with traders and stockist of banarasi sari
Now try to look if this is the real problem. As suggested in your blog problem lies with the inability of Assam Silk to market themselves. In general whenever the spurious product comes to market. It not only increases the market for main brand but also create the awareness. Take a example of shoes. I mean how can a person living in village know that a brand name Puma Exists.
Now as a recent case, is Banarasi Sari a spurious product or fake brand ?? Certainly not, it has higher demand and brand presence across the world.
I strongly feel we can have to serious look at marketing the product which revolves around two industrial product approach namely
1. Standardisation of product and Quality and hence decreasing the cost
2. No two product can be similar as it is hand made ( Remeber Fab India )
We need to clearly define whom we want to sell the Assam Silk. What is it USP and how is it going to compete with Banarasi or any other silk in the market. Simply making a economy close will never work. You can argue that in order to protect local weevers we will never allow the sales of any other silk in north east.
So have to take up the competition head to head.
Look at the marketing channels
1. State owned handicrafts store
2. National Handicrafts store
3. Private Stores
4. Online retail like FabIndia and KraftsVilla
Each channel will require its own marketing efforts. And here role of State Agency and NGOs are very important.
Second point suggested by you is making it geographical Indicator. However, before rushing to suggest this. We clearly need to work with these weever to either reduced cost or improve efficiency or standardised the product.
Any geographical indicator products which where converted into brand is mainly because of its standardised delivery of quality product consistently. A detailed study has to be done on this. And it will take time.
However look at the advertisement in your blog, its from myntra.com. And if myntra can sell a saari at 10k bucks why not assam silk.
All factor has to work cohesive in order to revive the product and create the brand. A product which is costlier has to sell because its worth it and USP need to be built around that only.
hmmm to much morning thought
Agree to your points except for 2 of the
ReplyDelete1. Its not against Benarasi silk that the agitation is about but rather Benarasi being dyed to look like Assam silk. To draw an analogy, no one will accept Assam tea being packed as Darjeeling and sold.
2. The point of ban on sale means that for a geographical indicator say Assam silk authorised outlets should be pit up and the sell them sourcing from the handlooms. Any party unauthorised should be brought to book. This then creates seperate brand images and easier marketing. In this argument i never meant that any other silk be banned from sale but that one shouldn't be morphed into another and thereby dupe the consumer.
Yes i agree that NGOs producers and marketers need to go hand in hand in this regard..
Please get the word out regarding this...thanks for the comment...