With apologies to Jules Verne (WE, 2003), a Rocket Science LE, the MB pen is not.

Which brings us to a different 'space oddity:'

Shameless imitation is one thing. Brand-equity theft is quite another, and one for which, in the end, MB customers pay dearly.

Judging by the number of current MB threads devoted, in some way, to doubts of product-authenticity and prospects of commercial fraud, four conclusions seem timely:

1) MB is apparently the industry's leading knock-off target,

2) MB counterfeits now have better fit and finish than at any previous time,

3) MB fakes are a seductive, prolific and lucrative global enterprise, and

4) MB appears to be doing "precious" little damage-control.

In such a threatening and discouraging scenario, fair questions are these:

*Exactly *what* is MB's anti-piracy agenda?

*What assurance does a good-faith buyer have that his/her "investment" in a new, authentic MB product will be supported by aggressive Richemont SA/Vendôme Group actions to protect the brand from knock-off dilution?

*How can a private owner/bearer of a legitimate new, used, or vintage instrument easily establish/verify its authenticity for any number of purposes (e.g., insurance, estate valuation, trade-in, sale, etc.)?

*And how can the prospective or current new owner of a used or vintage MB be sure that the article is genuine?

Going forward with new production, a snappy recommendation would be to embed a silicon chip within the cap of every device. In turn, each MB boutique and authorized dealer would deploy a corresponding high-tech wand "scanner" to authenticate any advanced-production pen brought in--and issue a certificate on the spot. Although this approach offers hope for the future, it's of no help to the past. (And as far as we know, MB isn't pursuing such an initiative.)

The 'installed base' presents an intractable problem. Perhaps the only way out is to offer, via MB boutiques and a handful of trusted third parties, a (free) manual authenticity-check, with issuance of a certificate then and there. No obligation, no questions asked.

These measures, along with broad publicity, point-of-sale collaterals, viral tactics (e.g., blogs, forums, Web 2.0, etc.), and litigation (e.g., Tiffany v. eBay, etc.) would go a long way toward reassuring the MB community that 'Meisterstück' is...for life. Still, they offer no solution at all to the pernicious impact on the marketplace of larcenous, large-scale MB cloning.

Regrettably, in this high-stakes moon-shot, Canal Street and eBay have lift-off.

--BAM

Good luck pushing that "free authenticity check" past Montblanc.

Don't they still charge admission to their stores?

Collecotrs might stop buying MB because indeed you might not know if you buy a fake or not.
There resale value can drop from the same problem.
I think MB will help itself if they will find a way to ensure what you buy (second hand) is the real thing.
It will help them in the long run and also help them improve their image in the eyes of the pen community.

I don't think that once the pen is initially sold they really care much. they put the serial number on isn't that enough
As well I don't think they care about their image in the eyes of the pen community- maybe the collector community but that's why you get people wanting to buy unopened boxed pens.

I would expect that a cost analysis was done to determine exactly what they should do about counterfeiting and they are doing exactly what costs the least and gets the most results.

From what I understand (though I certainly can be wrong), MB doesn't track the serial numbers they put on things. The can verify that a serial number has been used (though apparently they duplicated some numbers from the early series in 1991)

Like most everything else in the security business, RFID is only secure with some very sophisticated cryptography-based authentication backing it up. Implementing a sophisticated solution costs a great deal of money. Most RFID implementations, even those by banks, use low security. For example, many employers use keycards with an RFID chip in them, which respond with some number. It's possible to build as an electronics project, a simple batter-powered portable reader, security manager, scan the number without getting closer than two or three feet, and then implant that number in a new RFID chip. Wave the new chip at the door-card readers, and you have that security manager's access, and the system can't tell the difference. Now imagine doing this with a bank's poorly-implemented RFID debit card system.

In the context of luxury goods, imagine 50,000 Chinese-made MB 146 replicas with a chip inside that has a serial number copied from a real one. Unless the stores have a co-ordinated security network of the serial numbers and a program that watches for "unusual" circumstances, the RFID chips won't show up as a problem. With almost no more effort, the counterfeiter could put different serial numbers in each chip.

Aside from the people who worry about MB's bottom line, and some pen collectors, nobody really cares (and compared to the total size of MB's market, there's a very small number of collectors, and an even smaller number of them active online). For MB, each security change has cost-benefit implications, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that sophisticated, highly expensive security programs are just not much benefit to their bottom line. I'm quite sure also that MB doesn't care too much about the vintage pen market.

Food for thought: Counterfeit MB pens are free advertising for Montblanc. Why would MB want to stop that?

Oy.

This is such a twisted subject, I don't know where to begin.

I'm an artist, and at one time I made handcrafted jewelry. My style was rustic, ethnic and antique - I did no contemporary types of work and used lots of non-precious materials in my work. When you create something, no matter if you are a little guy like me, or a top name designer like Ralph Lauren, Tiffany, etc., you want to protect the integrity of your design and it's always a concern if someone has stolen one of your designs. This was always a topic of heated discussion on the jewelry making forums.

I've always felt that you paid more for an item, (Mercedes, Montblanc, Tiffany) because you could afford it and you've chosen to display that wealth. Someone who can afford a Montblanc would never want a knock off - they want to be able to say they have the real thing. The people that buy knock off's, (Rolex, Tiffany, Kate Spade) are trying to project an image that they can't afford and it's usually pretty obvious when you start to spot the inconsistencies. (Chanel purse over the shoulder of a someone wearing off the rack Wal-Mart clothes.)

Certain products cost more because they are better made. Some people will buy the same cheap junk over and over again never realizing that if they would just save up for the higher priced item that it would last longer and perform better.

As far as it being free advertising for the knock off's to be in circulation, I highly doubt that. Showing your fake Rolex off to your friends that work at Burger King isn't going to do anything for Rolex sales except sell more fake Rolex's. If someone who can afford a real Rolex sees that he's wearing something that's easily knocked off, then he's going to give up the Rolex and buy something else that shows off his wealth that hasn't yet been knocked off.

One thing I HAVE considered on many occasions, is that the name brand manufacturers actually oversee/control the production/distribution of the replicas. It just makes so much sense to me. Flood the market with cheap imitations to sell to people that would never be able to contribute to your normal market share. We already know that various clothing manufacturers like Tommy Hilfinger sell different lines (and different qualities) of clothing in different markets. Department stores versus boutique vs discount stores.

Some thoughtful comments, biffybeans.

Even Levi's has joined the downmarket crowd with its "Signature" line. (And we were thinking $32 for a pair of 501s was cheap...)

And now a bit of irony. As the story goes, Ralph Lauren got his start selling ties of uncertain origin out of the trunk of his car...

--BAM

Levi's "Signature" line came about because of Levi Strauss & company being "saved" from extinction by Wal Mart. Levi's are no longer made in the US, and Wal Mart said that they didn't think their shoppers would pay for "real" Levi's, so they forced them to come up with the Signature line....

Where to begin...

Knockoff, copies (cheap or not), and counterfeit items are just one more form of thievery. Stealing is stealing whether it is a candy bar or a thousand dollar pen. Whether you like Microsoft or not, China has a program of stealing their software that is the stuff of wonder. The same goes for too many other products. Alas, the ineptitude of governments to enforce intellectual property rights is astounding. This is one of the rightful tasks of government, to protect its citizens from abuse from afar, be it violence or thievery.

Nonetheless, since college students began stealing music thinking it was "like, totally, like, okay," this situation has grown by leaps and bounds. I'm amazed at how many younger people think it's "like, totally, like, no big deal, okay, like, what?" to copy books, music, whatever they want with no regard for the effort of those who produced it.

One solution, while simple, is not easy. All of these goods must enter the country somewhere. Enforcement at the point of entry is not as difficult as it sounds. Yes, ten thousand container loads of goods pass through the port of Long Beach every so many hours. Just like good doctors, you triage, and deal with the most urgent. And when you catch them at it, start a vicious reprisal against the perpetrators.

And don't tell me its a small percentage of manufacturers because it is not. Recent reports show more than 50% of the software in China is stolen including that specific to such esoteric uses as machine tool control (probably operating in a factory producing fake MB's).

Why do we allow China to sell anything in the United States when they continually, and admittedly steal? Oh, I know, because we can't resist those Wal Mart prices.

Alas, there is the enemy... he's staring at me from the mirror.

OT...

biffybeans,

Well, Levi Straus & Co.'s "Signature" line may have been a concession to big-box retail in general, and WMT in particular, but we're not sure the initiative was appropriate or that it can contribute much to Levi's earnest revival.

Much of what was wrong with this American icon (especially, a shortfall of relevance) was self-inflicted and remains unresolved. Still, its foreign-produced (largely Mexico) classic products are well made and affordable.

And then there's Wal-Mart, the $388B elephant in the room. Under CEO Lee Scott's 8-year watch, it's returned to shareholders precious little while morphing into an outpost of the Chinese Ministry of Trade.

Although it isn't widely known, the legacy of WMT's controversial former marketing-madame, Julie Roehm, was to bring the merchant to a rite of passage--a brilliant promise--it wasn't to fulfill.

Her tagline for Wal-Mart, sculpted of Precious Resin: "A Life Well Spent."

--BAM

"A life well spent," in her WMT context...

as if you can buy a life.