Digital strategy for "luxury" fonts

KP Mawhood
KP Mawhood Posts: 296
in Type Business
Given the multitude of discussions about marketing fonts (often, a luxury product).
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/luxury-terrible-ecommerce/

Comments

  • Oliver Weiss (Walden Font Co.)
    Oliver Weiss (Walden Font Co.) Posts: 213
    How does this relate to the type business? 
  • John Hudson
    John Hudson Posts: 3,189
    often, a luxury product
    In the sense that demand is such that spending on fonts is disproportional to income and people are purchasing licenses for fonts that they do not need?
  • KP Mawhood
    KP Mawhood Posts: 296
    John Hudson said:
    often, a luxury product
    In the sense that demand is such that spending on fonts is disproportional to income and people are purchasing licenses for fonts that they do not need?
    Could be? Luxury items are the opposite of necessity goods, which people buy regardless of their income level or wealth. I think Bruno Maag once said that fonts are luxury products although I cannot trace the reference.The article has its own definitions, a few interpretations:

    "Favourite typefaces" licensed to the max:
    These are high-quality products or services, offered at prices so high that many consumers will not afford them. Those prices are partially justified by the high quality, but more so by the emotional connection that their devotees have with the brand. 
      "Cult-status typefaces":
      Luxury brands often have cult-like followings, and their products may act as status symbols.
      Tailor-made, high-value typefaces:
      Prices are so high that very few people in the world can afford them. 
      Finally, a reflection on retail licensing vs. custom work:
      …the same brand might have different offerings at different levels. For example, Hermès offers some accessories that cost a few hundred US dollars and are easily purchasable from their website — a luxury offering, but not an ultra-luxury one. However, they also sell the famous Birkin bag, which costs tens of thousands of dollars and is available by invitation to VIP customers only.
    • JoyceKetterer
      JoyceKetterer Posts: 812
      edited June 2022
      I feel like there's some conflation here between luxury and non-commercial.  Most people don't need non-system fonts because extra fonts aren't really all that useful at the personal level (especially given you can't use them in emails).  There are people who license fonts just for fun but I don't think that makes them any more of a luxury product than having an extra chair at your dining room table.  At the level of licensing most people need, fonts aren't especially expensive.
    • Mark Simonson
      Mark Simonson Posts: 1,734
      This reminds me of something House Industries did back around 2000 with their Luxury font collection, which were inspired by high-end brand logos. It's been priced normally since a few years later, but I recall that the original price was something like $1000 for the basic license. 
    • Russell McGorman
      Russell McGorman Posts: 262
      When I hear the words luxury fonts, I think of the sort of fonts that get used to represent "luxury" brands. The fonts them selves are tools a graphic designer might use, or not use, depending on the project. Kind of like, are you going to use a hammer, a screwdriver or a wrench? 
    • Matthew Smith
      Matthew Smith Posts: 89
      Christian from Commercial Type tweeted about Luxury in this Twitter thread. The entire conversation is a bit relevant to this topic.

      To quote the tweet: “The initial incarnation of the Luxury Collection (when it was more conceptual art project than typeface, circa 2000) was priced high. I think it was $1500? We never sold a copy and rereleased it as a 'real' typeface with @houseindustries a few years later.”

      The conversation also turns towards Enschedé’s Lexicon which sells for $391.00 per style for a single user. (Which I am surprised hasn’t been brought up in this thread yet.)
    • John Hudson
      John Hudson Posts: 3,189
      There is a casual use of the term ‘luxury’ that applies to anything that isn’t a necessity (often alongside failure to consider what constitutes a ‘need’ except in the most basic sense of shelter, clothing, food). In that sense, most fonts would be considered luxuries to most people most of the time. But that is not the meaning of luxury good in economic terms, and I am finding this whole discussion untethered from any meaningful, systematic analysis of what constitutes a luxury good and, hence, whether there are luxury fonts.

      Commercial Type’s Luxury project, in its initial conceptual art project phase, seems to support my instinct that no, fonts are not luxury goods, because deliberately positioning a font family in the market as if it were a luxury good means no one buys it.

      And yes, these conversations often turn toward’s The Enschedé Font Foundry, but does high(er) price automatically equate to luxury good? I would say that market activity around a product is a necessary consideration here, and something is only a luxury good, in the economic sense, if people are buying it regardless of their income level. Who purchases licenses for TEFF fonts? I have seen them in use by some Netherlands publishers, but almost nowhere else. That suggests to me that their pricing makes them exclusive rather than luxury.
    • Nick Shinn
      Nick Shinn Posts: 2,208
      Shinntype has fonts at a great range of price points, including several that are premium-priced, but is not a luxury brand per se.
      A more realistic marker for foundries would be the typical base price of fonts for desktop licences. Mine is US$39.
    • KP Mawhood
      KP Mawhood Posts: 296
      Nick Shinn said:
      A more realistic marker for foundries would be the typical base price of fonts for desktop licences. Mine is US$39.
      Chanel will not sell a handbag for much less than €2,000 but moves millions of €30 lipsticks. Is a desktop license more like a lipstick or a wrench – it depends, right?
      John Hudson said:
      There is a casual use of the term ‘luxury’ that applies to anything that isn’t a necessity… But that is not the meaning of luxury good in economic terms, and I am finding this whole discussion untethered from any meaningful, systematic analysis of what constitutes a luxury good…
      "Income elasticity of demand" is a mouthful, whereas "the opposite of necessity goods" is much easier to understand *and* aligns with economic terms (double win ).
       …and, hence, whether there are luxury fonts.
      Which fonts are sensitive to changes in buyers income and/or wealth?

      Not sure how easily this could be measured with one-off perpetual desktop licenses, but could (in theory) be analysed with extended licensing needs in regard to consumer activity. Equally, some fonts will never fit the economic definition of luxury goods due to negative income elasticity of demand.
      Matthew Smith said:
      To quote the tweet: “The initial incarnation of the Luxury Collection (when it was more conceptual art project than typeface, circa 2000) was priced high. I think it was $1500? We never sold a copy and rereleased it as a 'real' typeface with @houseindustries a few years later.”
      If the initial incarnation never sold, then that iteration didn't impact luxury font sales. It's interesting as a case study and conceptual art project. I'm not clear that it gives insight into luxury fonts in economics terms.
      John Hudson said:
      And yes, these conversations often turn toward’s The Enschedé Font Foundry, but does high(er) price automatically equate to luxury good? I would say that market activity around a product is a necessary consideration here, and something is only a luxury good, in the economic sense, if people are buying it regardless of their income level. Who purchases licenses for TEFF fonts? I have seen them in use by some Netherlands publishers, but almost nowhere else. That suggests to me that their pricing makes them exclusive rather than luxury.
      Price and exclusivity can be a useful quantifiers of luxury, for instance in surveys conducted with HENRIs (high earners not yet rich) and HNWIs (high net worth individuals). What best exemplifies what “luxury” means to them… etc.
    • Jasper de Waard
      Jasper de Waard Posts: 639
      edited June 2022
      While I agree with most of the arguments against luxury fonts, here's a consideration I didn't read yet:

      A huge part of the appeal of luxury products is the exclusivity. Few people have them, because they are so expensive. A similar argument could be made for 'luxury' typefaces. Price them high, and whoever buys them can be sure that this font will not be the next 'hot' typeface, so that it can be used somewhat (though not completely) exclusively by the buyer. 
    • KP Mawhood
      KP Mawhood Posts: 296
      Ray Larabie said:
      Luxury goods show their brand name on the product but that's not possible unless the buyer adds a logo or something? I don't think this idea makes any sense.
      In the next part of the series, a study suggests that some buyers do not appreciate logos.
      https://www.nngroup.com/articles/luxury-user-groups-journeys/

      "Some luxury shoppers wanted noticeable brand logos on the luxury products they bought and used… On the other hand, some shoppers (particularly big spenders) preferred to have subtle logos on their luxury goods — if any logo at all. They reported feeling this way for one or more of the following reasons:
      • They felt that heavily branded items with noticeable logos were too “flashy” or “tacky” and not a “refined” approach to luxury.
      • They had seen many fake, knockoff versions of the heavily branded items.
      • They wanted to avoid being perceived as trying too hard or showing off, particularly around people who couldn’t afford those items."
      Ray Larabie said:
      Luxury products serve as a status symbol, but fonts alone cannot do so. 
      How do fonts not serve as a status symbol for those who are interested – isn't that part of the point of a custom made typeface? It's exclusive, it's unique, it's expensive.
      Ray Larabie said:
      Because fonts are not intended for personal usage, purchasing an expensive one is pointless. Because you can't hang it on your wall or wear it, it fails.
      Personal branding.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_branding
    • Nicholas Garner
      Nicholas Garner Posts: 18
      I struggle to apply the word luxury to a font. The concept just doesn't fit - it's simply not a meaningful adjective to use. For some, a banana might be a luxury, for others a Ferrari. Perhaps a hot bath or an expensive watch. But a font? I don't think so.

      On the subject of The Enschedé Type Foundry (mentioned above in this context), they seem deliberately to shun the mass market and this draws me like a magnet to their product. I suppose with over 300 years of history behind them they can afford to go their own way. Their website, which appears not to have changed in over 10 years is an object lesson in restraint. The absence of online user testing or purchase/download options, webfonts etc., suggest that this is a foundry that understands its own market. No special offers, no newsletter or blog, no social media links, just a discreet contact email address on the home page. How refreshing!
    • Jasper de Waard
      Jasper de Waard Posts: 639
      I never thought someone would consider the TEFF website refreshing ;)
    • James Puckett
      James Puckett Posts: 1,993
      Is TEFF trying to be a luxury brand, or are they just haughty?
    • Craig Eliason
      Craig Eliason Posts: 1,436
      Or did they just stay put while most of the rest of the industry moved downmarket?
    • Nick Shinn
      Nick Shinn Posts: 2,208
      KP said:

      Chanel will not sell a handbag for much less than €2,000 but moves millions of €30 lipsticks. Is a desktop license more like a lipstick or a wrench – it depends, right?

      Not a valid comparison, unless I position the foundry as a luxury brand of expensive fonts, and also sell, say, chewing gum. On the other hand, I suppose you could say that the luxury product I sell is bespoke fashion (custom fonts), and the retail font licences are the lipstick.
    • John Butler
      John Butler Posts: 290
      TEFF’s Trinité and dfType’s Rialto remain on my wishlist to license one day. Their beauty is singular, like a Wiesmann or Spyker automobile. I don’t want to see them driving all over every road.
    • Stephen Coles
      Stephen Coles Posts: 1,007
      edited June 2022
      Craig Eliason said:
      Or did they just stay put while most of the rest of the industry moved downmarket?
      Naw, their prices have always been 2–10x higher than the rest of the market.

      I think @Jasper de Waard has it right, at least in TEFF’s case. They prefer their fonts be used by a specific segment of the market, primarily publishers who produce high-end books and journals.
    • Florian Pircher
      Florian Pircher Posts: 176
      Rialto is available on Adobe Fonts which should help its spread, but I don’t think I have ever seen it anywhere on the web (well, except for my own usage). Maybe part of luxury is a design being an acquired taste.
    • Eris Alar
      Eris Alar Posts: 454
      I equate luxury items to things I cannot justify buying usually, so buying them is a special consideration. Fonts absolutely fit this, buying font licenses is something I do rarely as they are just out of my price range. Most clients I work with want Adobe Fonts or free fonts so they can implement them fairly easily across their teams without addition costs. Buying licences is rare. 
    • Claudio Piccinini
      Claudio Piccinini Posts: 681
      James Puckett said:
      Is TEFF trying to be a luxury brand, or are they just haughty?
       :D:D:D 
      John Hudson said:
      Commercial Type’s Luxury project, in its initial conceptual art project phase, seems to support my instinct that no, fonts are not luxury goods, because deliberately positioning a font family in the market as if it were a luxury good means no one buys it.
      I seem to recall Christian Schwartz said that at the beginning it was meant as a semi-joke but I may be wrong.
    • Stephen Coles
      Stephen Coles Posts: 1,007
      Yes, besides the more recent Twitter thread linked above, you can read Christian’s description on his own site.

    Categories