I agree with all of this. It's such a shame to see the brands that once were synonymous with high quality become cheap crap. While I understand that if the market will tolerate cheap crap the market will get cheap crap and, conversely, if the market won't tolerate cheap crap it won't get cheap crap, it is still painful to see it happen, especially in those instances when it really didn't have to happen. Sometimes the market just doesn't care about quality and manufactures legitimately have little choice. But in the case of brands that stood on a reputation for quality that is less likely to be the case and it is more likely to be the case of short-term MBA thinking running a company straight into the crapper.
The company my dad worked for was a shining example of that. The guy that started it built a reputation for quality compressors and also became the DigiKey of the compressor parts world in the region. They stocked lots of parts that seldom sold but when someone wanted that part, they had it and could come pick it up. They had quite a few parts that they only sold every few years. One example I can think of was some gaskets use on most of the compressors used by Denver Public Schools. Every few years (three, I think) their maintenance plan called for them to do a partial teardown of the compressors and part of that was installing new gaskets. Most people never replaced those gaskets, so they were hard to find. But my dad (who was the manager of purchasing and inventory) made sure that they had sufficient stock on hand to do all of their compressors. When DPS hit that maintenance event, they didn't even call anyone else, they simply went down and bought them from my dad's company. Thus they became the first stop place for many business for any of their parts business, not just the hard to find stuff.
But, eventually, the owner turned the business over to his two kids whom he had sent to business school and one of the first things they did was analyze the inventory costs and show how much money they were losing by stocking parts that didn't sell some minimum amount each month. Yes, having those gaskets sitting there for a few years probably tied up a hundred bucks in inventory that could have been being used for something else plus exposed them to a small inventory tax that Denver had (probably still has). Those were hard numbers that their MBA programs taught them how to crunch. But they didn't even attempt to consider how much the effective advertising value of having those gaskets on hand was or how much business they stood to lose if they stopped stocking them. Those weren't things that you could easily put numbers to, and so they were just ignored. Similarly, they showed how having an in-stock rate of over 95% was WAY to high and that the optimal in-stock rate was much lower (something like 70%, if I recall). So they forced changes to the inventory levels that they had just "proven" would make the business so much more profitable and were at a complete loss to explain why, in less than a year, the company's parts business had declined by almost half as customers found other 'first-shop' sources, some of which were in neighboring states. The company effectively folded a few years later.
