Re: A moral question
- Subject: Re: A moral question
- From: "Bill Meyer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:38:16 -0500
I have to say that I find it truly refreshing when a bad guy comes
right out and stands up for himself in front of everyone. I've really grown
tired of the endless "Why I'm not really a bad guy" stuff that is so
commonplace these days. I won't hold it against you that your "out of the
closet" statement comes as you are leaving the hosta business, when there
might be no impact on said business.
The part about not wasting your time with "hybridizers whining about
someone 'stealing their plants'" when they don't do enough to protect them
was the most honest statement I've heard yet made publicly. I also liked the
smirking about "supposedly shared morals". Believe it or not, some of us
actually do share morals. Even some businesspeople. I never said all
businesspeople have no morals or ethics.
I think it pretty much backs up my point about businesspeople needing
laws to regulate them, because morality and ethics, right and wrong, good
and evil, and such are no part of the amoral business world in general. In a
way, they might be considered a handicap. Until, of course, such attitudes
become public, when they tend to affect sales. You make a wonderful argument
that very clearly and bravely puts forth the creed of some people in the
business world - "Get whatever you can unless somebody can stop you". The
Law of the Jungle - no morals wanted here.
Of course this is all moot at the retail level, since this happens at
the manufacturing level. As a retailer, you just buy and sell. But the
attitude is the issue. You hit it right on the head. As a hybridizer, I have
no rights other than what I pay for or enforce myself. As a businessperson,
you not only can but actually should stick it to me as much as you can. Give
me the business as it were. There is no general "Code of Honor" that
everyone follows. This same philosophy would also apply to written contracts
in the following way if I am correct.
First try to disarm the person you are making a contract with by
pretending to "share morals" with them so they don't have a lawyer look it
over. Then try to leave as many holes in there as you can to legally get you
out of any obligations you agree to. Once signed, take full advantage of any
tricks or loopholes that you got by them. Then tell them to stop whining
about your "stealing" from them. That would be OK to do in the "war", right?
All's fair in a "war", isn't it. I'm not accusing you of doing anything of
the kind, but I've heard complaints of such behavior about others. It isn't
really a "war", though, is it? It's just a business arrangement. It's only
about making a few dollars, not life or death. You can afford a little
morality, can't you? Even if it costs a few dollars you might otherwise make
by trashing your own reputation?
My arguments about more public discussion affecting business in a
positive way were not in jest. I know the words "good name" seem meaningless
on the surface to you, but in reality they affect all businesses in the long
run. Get yourself a bad name as an unethical businessperson, and you're on a
downhill slope. Ethical people and businesses will deal with you only if it
is necessary and then not if there's someone better to deal with. Other
unethical ones will know better than to trust you, but are at least familiar
with their own kind. I'm talking about the long run, not the immediate
future. Business that start off as openly unethical seldom go far. This
really applies mainly to small businesses, not the big ones that can
manipulate the market.
What Bill was talking about was not squeezing some money out of our
plants before they hit the market as TC's. He was talking about the lack of
recompense most hybridizers have received for their work in an environment
where the laws do not require royalties to be paid. Also the dealings of a
small number of dishonest businessmen who have cheated them with agreements
they did not fulfill and gotten away with it because the dollar amounts are
too small to be worth pursuing legally.
And everybody just stop saying that all nurserymen are dishonest! I
didn't say that - you did. I don't agree with you that they are, so don't
include me in that one. Some I've known were scrupulously honest, including
Chick. Others were about as honest as your average street criminal/junkie.
One more question if I might......... Does Martha belong in prison?
After all, you could argue that she was just maximizing her income. Morals,
shmorals, get what you can.
> Dear Hosta Open amigos,
> Dan, Chic, and Bill have all done an excellent job, IMO, of addressing
Glen's original question about protecting the interests of Hosta hybridizers
who wish to make a little money, or even a lot of money, from reselling
their "personal" creations.
> My brief sojourn into and, at least for the near future, back out of, the
Hosta resale business taught me a lot in a brief period of time. I already
knew a fair amount about business (with an MBA plus 16 years of small
business ownership, which was much better than the MBA at giving me a degree
from the "school of hard knocks"--THE SINGLE MOST valuable degree a SMALL
business person can earn). Unfortunately, I did not know a lot about the
subtle differences that the NURSERY business provides. I believe those are
only learned while being IN the business.
> When we look at product life cycles, as applied to Hosta in particular,
there are two cycles occurring simultaneously, and probably more. The two
readily evident ones are, 1) the market for Hostas in general, as a
shade-tolerant perennial plant, and 2) the market for special flavors of
this perennial. In any market, once supply catches up with demand, and
capacity to produce that supply develops significant excess capacity, the
price for the product plummets. All one needs to do is look at what
micropropagation has done for supply and it's easy to understand why, for
most varieties, Hosta growers and hybridizers are now pricetakers and not
pricemakers. The plant has become a commodity in most of its flavors.
> I believe what Bill is talking about, and certainly legitimately, is, "How
does a Hybridizer, who invests years and years into producing something that
is truly unique, do a little "price skimming" before the TC manufacturers
take the plant into mass production and mega-sales through "price
penetration"?" This can only be done by controlling supply. Hybridizers
and resellers can do little to actually increase the demand (though what
little can be done IS being done through advertising, garden tours,
conventions, WOM, etc).
> Up until the late 80's, it was much easier for a hybridizer to control
distribution because most plants were produced through vegatative
propagation. Limited supply created some astronomically high prices for
rare cultivars and the "mystique" of the Hosta was reserved for the
well-healed. Probably 90% of the serious Hosta collectors were either
wealthy or they became good at producing their own cultivars, or at trading,
to avoid having to pay such high prices. It was a wonderful time. I got
into the market just at the tail end of this "bubble".
> Now that micropropagation is occurring in China, these "rare" plants can
be mass produced PRIOR to their introduction. Buyers are now more aware of
the available supply (e.g. Choo-Choo-Train was introduced with in excess of
17,000 plants). The available inventory from Shady Oaks has been published
for years and now is readily available for all to see on the web. Add to
this the Hosta Finder and I believe we have identified the hybridizers two
biggest enemies--more than adequate supply and relative ease of access to
any limited supply.
> The market for Hostas is no longer local, or even regional. It is
national or even international. Certainly the supply has gone global if not
the demand. When people know where to find rare plants, and there is some
competition, the price adjusts accordingly. Now that a goodly portion of
the mystique is gone, a fair amount of the hybridizer's ability to "price
skim" has disappeared with it.
> I think if Bill, and those many other hybridizers who, like myself, cannot
cost justify spending the exorbitant amount of money to patent a plant would
enter into a limited distribution agreement, reduced to writing, they MIGHT
be able to control the supply, at least for a little while. I think Mary
Chastain did this recently with at least one distributor. I don't know how
well this worked out. Unfortunately, other than patenting the plant, this
is, IMO, the ONLY legitimate angle that a hybridizer can take with the
market--controlling distribution through legally enforceable agreements.
> This is where Bill is right, IMO, that morals DO play a significant role
in business. Most legal agreements are only as good as the people who sign
their names to them. The cost of enforcing contracts is nearly as
exorbitant as obtaining a patent because it involves lawyers. What a
business person really wants to do is work with people who honor their
agreements and even that is very difficult. Economics and issues beyond
their control can affect ones ability to perform. But to not reduce this to
writing is truly a crap shoot. I can't remember much of what I said
yesterday, let alone a year or two ago! To "hope" that people will somehow
be altruistic in their business endeavors, guarding the business interests
of others without being compensated for such protection? ... Bill, surely
> As Dan and Chic have so eloquently pointed out, it's not true that savvy
business people who follow the laws are "crooks" even if the public
perceives them to be in some intangible way. People can't run businesses
based on what others perceive to be the "moral high ground"--they must run
them based on existing laws. We ALL know customers who make unreasonable
demands of sellers, and many of us know hybridizers who are just as
cantakerous in making unreasonable requests on their intended, or
> The moral of the story is, "Business is war, and war is Hell" and, "if you
can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen". I did the latter, at least
for a time, not because of any pressures from customers--Lord knows there
are gazillions of customers and I'm sure over 98% of my customers were very
happy--but instead because of the ungodly number of hours one has to put
into the business in order to work themselves up to even minimum wage.
70-80 hour work weeks during the season that translate to what one could
make in just a few hours in other endeavors indicates either intense love
(of the plant and the people who grow it), or a mild case of insanity.
> My conclusion was that if I was doing this for the love of the plant, then
I could keep going, but if making a living was important, this path would
require 5-10+ years of investment before the ball could get rolling well
enough to call it a real business (one that generates profits).
> During all of the flurry of activity that occurs during the sales season,
to take time to worry about hybridizers whining about somebody "stealing
their plants" when they had not taken the steps to protect their own
interests?-- I think Chic and Dan answered this quite well. We all see the
world through different colored glasses but their is only one REAL business
world and that is the one that is controlled by laws, not by supposedly
> If hybridizers want to protect a revenue stream, they must either patent
their plants or reduce to writing their expectations for distribution
control. Otherwise, they are fighting a battle they cannot win. It's not
the nature of business to protect those who are not savvy (about how to
achieve even a modicum of a chance at winning the war).
> Get your own family web site at www.MyFamily.com!
> To sign-off this list, send email to email@example.com with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN
To sign-off this list, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN