Lamenting The Great Sheaffer Days

[Estycollector]

 

According to you and others, the only thing to Montblanc is status symbol? This is what I get out of your post. There is that, but I think there is more. A few people kept telling me I should try a Montblanc to get a mice performing pen. I ya-ya-ya'ed it for years, but eventually I tried a 146, 144R, 149 and 144R in that order. Got rid of the 146 and 149. The 144s are nice, fine and medium. I have used them for years now, blissfully unaware of any pretentiousness. I am not going in for all the expensive eye candy stuff.

 

I would say I remember pleasantly rather than lament the glory days of Sheaffer. I have many desk pens and pocket pens of Touchdown and C/C Imperials. school pens. and a couple of Snorkels. Interesting and charming filling systems, not leaking if in good repair. It is important to me that pens not leak and write smoothly. I also like that Sheaffers are American from the 50s and 60s. I collect very, very few Asian pens and I don't care so much for Teutonic-looking stuff like Pelikan. I think I will clear those away. The prettier and less angular red ("Bordeaux") Montblanc 144s are more attractive, as are the Sheaffer Imperials and other oddities I have like a desk pen version of a school pen in blue with a Touchdown filler and a stub nib.

 

I think some of the commentary about Montblanc has obvious truth about making money by catering to the upscale, but there is more to Montblanc than that.

I think you are spot on, or at least it was for me when I bought a MB 149 back in the earkly '90's. I bought it for the same reasons many purchase a Rolex. While I appreciate the beauty of a Submariner, a $45 Casio diver will perform just as well for most uses.

 

I think the same is true today for a well made Lamy Al Star for most uses folks need a writing instrument. I do not agree or at least to date no comvicing argument has been made that MB makes a better writing instrument or leather goods or watches.

 

I appreciate vintage items and getting them up and working. I carry them because I enjoy their daily use.

 

Presently I have no modern Sheaffer because I am fully satisfied with my late '40's Crest with its two tone Triumph nib. I do no lament Sheaffer glory days anymore than I lament Esterbrook's failure. They had their day and now it is past.

 

Today, Pilot appears to be on top with writing instruments.

[FredRydr]

The word "lament" is being misunderstood in this thread, unless Sheaffer's glory days are seen as something deplorable to regret. Look it up.

[kazoolaw]

The intent is to lament the passing of the glory days.

[Estycollector]

The word "lament" is being misunderstood in this thread, unless Sheaffer's glory days are seen as something deplorable to regret. Look it up.

Perhaps you need to look it up yourself, Fred.

[FredRydr]

Perhaps you need to look it up yourself, Fred.

You'll have to explain what you think lament means.

[Estycollector]

You'll have to explain what you think lament means.

Words have meanings, Fred, and not what I think it means. A lament is a "sorrowful expression of grief" or to mourn the passing of something important or personally important. So, the context of the thread is to lament something that is no longer perceived true for the OP regarding Sheaffer.

 

There is a Old Testament book titled Lamitations that laments the distruction of Jerusalem.

[tleek]

I think Fred is pointing out that we are lamenting the passing of sheaffers good ol days not the good good ol days themself.

 

 

Tomāto tomato guys. We all get the point. No need to take ourselves so seriously.

[FredRydr]

I think Fred is pointing out that we are lamenting the passing of sheaffers good ol days not the good good ol days themself.

 

 

Tomāto tomato guys. We all get the point. No need to take ourselves so seriously.

Precisely. I agree. It's just that when Etsy was starting to misuse it again as does the OP, I nudged a correction.

Edited September 20, 2020 by FredRydr

[Estycollector]

Here's an abstract from the opening post, "i just wish someone would at least try making a pen with an inlaid nib. Something so elegant about those nibs. I don’t think anything beats a smooth Targa.

But I’m older now. Miss those heady Sheaffer days so much."

Sounds to me that he is lamenting pen construction. Doesn't matter which, the defintion for lament can apply to both pen construction and the "good old days".

Peace, Fred.

[Batman]

Here's an abstract from the opening post, "i just wish someone would at least try making a pen with an inlaid nib. Something so elegant about those nibs. I don’t think anything beats a smooth Targa.

But I’m older now. Miss those heady Sheaffer days so much."

Sounds to me that he is lamenting pen construction. Doesn't matter which, the defintion for lament can apply to both pen construction and the "good old days".

Peace, Fred.

 

I understand your longing for Sheaffer's past but Sheaffer today IS making a revival with its inlaid nib in the Legacy and the reminder clip ballpoint. Not all is lost.

[max dog]

 

I understand your longing for Sheaffer's past but Sheaffer today IS making a revival with its inlaid nib in the Legacy and the reminder clip ballpoint. Not all is lost.

That's promising. I hope Sheaffer will make a come back. I checked their website just now and the inlaid nib is back in the Legacy Heritage. Last year the site did not list any. They also had the Prelude, 300 and Intesity.

 

I don't know how the current Legacy Heritage inlaid nibs compare to the vintage, but based on mine, they are remarkable writers and great pens in their own right.

[tleek]

That's promising. I hope Sheaffer will make a come back. I checked their website just now and the inlaid nib is back in the Legacy Heritage. Last year the site did not list any. They also had the Prelude, 300 and Intesity.

 

I don't know how the current Legacy Heritage inlaid nibs compare to the vintage, but based on mine, they are remarkable writers and great pens in their own right.

That sheaffer legacy actually looks really nice. I’m glad they retained the imperial look. Aesthetically I prefer the diamond nib to Waterman’s inlaid Carene nib, but I do love my Carene. I’ve never used an inlaid sheaffer.

[Bill Wood]

On 7/21/2020 at 1:00 PM, inkstainedruth said:

Except of course now Sheaffer is owned by Cross.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

Ruth. Does that mean that Sheaffer is now listed on the Cross sites, or is Sheaffer have a site of its own. Thanks

-Bill

[inkstainedruth]

That I don't know.  I mostly have vintage Sheaffers (one early flat top, a number of Snorkels and at least one Touchdown, and the "family heirloom" Balance Oversize); the Cross pens I own (the two Solos, the Verve, and the Penetia) are modern-ish, but I don't know if they're still made (pretty sure the Verve isn').  

At least one of the Solos is marked as "made in Japan" and both are really good pens for the money: I paid I think $18 US for the red one with the F nib (from the estate of a friend -- not only is it a nice memento, but she was a calligrapher and bookbinder and we'd had a few nice chats about pens), and about $25 for the bright blue one with the B nib at the Ohio Pen Show a few years ago, and a converter was already installed).  The Penetia has a decent nib on it but the quality overall isn't that great (OTOH, I only paid $3 for it...).  

The Verve?  Uh, well, I paid a buck and someone gave me a converter for it.  I keep thinking I should put it back in rotation at some point and see if I can manage to hold it far enough back in order to keep ink off my fingers (that two piece nib is NOT remotely user friendly ) and still be able to control the writing experience.  But keep going "NAAAAAH...."  It's really scary how much I've seen them going for on the Bay of Evil... because as far as I'm concerned, a buck was a good price for the thing....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[adair]

Some of the best Sheaffers in my opinion were made during the company's twilight years in the USA, like the Legacy and the Valor. My Legacy (or Legacy Heritage? It uses a converter, not a pump) has one of the smoothest nibs that I have ever used--on par with the nib of my Montblanc 146,

[welch]

On 7/21/2020 at 11:24 PM, Parker51 said:

I do not believe Sheaffer was a viable element of an American Conglomerate past 1986. This was not because of anything they did or did not do, nor anything in regard to the Fountain Pen market, rather it was due to changes in which ways American Corporations were and are operated. If they had been sold to non-US Company they might have survived longer.

 

The problem was by 1986 US Companies largely stopped being valued on the basis of profitability and the projected ability to maintain long term profitability for the purpose of issuing dividends to stockholders. I recall that as early as the late 1970s those who were using sofisticated mathematical models had abandoned calculating multiples of dividends as a way to rate a Company in favor of the value proposition based on the projected sale of said Company that largely indicated it's share price. I had a University professor that had used those models to inform him to buy and then later sell for a huge profit Standard Oil of Ohio. The problem with Sheaffer during that period and later, which eventually led to its demise was it never really was able to seen as a Company, or unit of a Company which had growth potential such as to make its worth increase prospects attractive to either the company which owned it, or other companies which might buy it. And so instead of receiving funds for facilities, employee retention, advertising, research and sales it was starved and squeezed for its profits with them going to other businesses within the conglomerates it was a part of.

 

Montblanc the pen company portion was instead treated as a brand which could be and was built on in non-pen ways. It retained its Capital and profits which enabled it to both live comfortably and expand its product line of pens as those non-pen profit centers expanded. Today it continues to grow and show potential for future growth and so it is valued and given oppertunity for growth.

 

The focus on potential future growth in value rather than sustained profitability is what is currently pushing Tesla stock up so high. It barely makes a profit compared to its stock price and net value, but it doesn't have to as its ability to issue dividends is not considered important, only the stock price and projected future sale of it, or its actual parts.

 

Fascinating comment. I saw a similar thing at GE Information Services (GEIS). It had invented email, had built the first for-profit global network, outdid Compuserve just using spare server and network capacity in the evenings, when European and North American businesses were quiet.  GE Corporate, in the Jack Welch days, viewed every component either as a growing business, or as a business with potential about to come out of a down cycle in their target market, or as a cash cow. GE invested in future businesses, in recovering businesses, but not the cash cows. GEIS was a cash cow that had to turn over nearly all profits to HQ to help finance the dividends. Good people left, including the people who had commercialized GE's internal email system as Quick*Comm, and the guy who designed and coded the first data network. GE spun off the business about 2002. 

[welch]

On 9/19/2020 at 4:37 AM, max dog said:

Do a google search. Montblanc annual revenue $850 Million USD. Parker annual revenue $7 Million USD. Sheaffer annual revenue $3.4 Million USD. Cross annual revenue $74.5 Million USD. Pilot Corp Japan annual revenue $750 Million USD. Pilot USA annual revenue $34.5 Million USD. Sailor annual revenue $5.3 Million USD. Montegrappa annual revenue $94.4 Million USD.

 

Truth is in the pudding. MB is #1.

 

Safe to say Parker and Sheaffer are on life support. Too bad they didn't follow Montblancs lead.

 

And Cross is wisely upscaling their pens too and revenue is ten times Parkers.

 

Max, where did you find your revenue numbers? I read through a couple of Newell's annual reports, but never found break-out figures for Parker or for Waterman.

 

Here is the 2017 Annual Report, which shows that Parker, Waterman, and Paper Mate are part of Newell's Learning Division. That division reported $2.8 billion in revenue. Nothing more detailed. Someplace in the report, it says that the Waterman / Parker production facility is in Nantes, which celebrated 50 years of work. Must have started as the Waterman factory, and then moved to include Parker. No more details.