Boss’s Blog - Jim Kelly, Owner

Is There Value In Authenticity?

July 7th, 2008

We use a variety of names to describe what guides us when we make products. And whether we call it historically accurate, period authentic, or whatever; it is a challenge for us to communicate the essence, as well as the nuances, of our product creation process and guidelines.

What We Do

Our company history starts with my history as a renovator. A young and poor renovator - on a very limited budget, back in 1975. Since the little building I was restoring was extremely dilapidated, I needed lots of materials, from siding and millwork to hardware and lighting, to complete the project. I learned quickly about my options. Salvage was cool and often quite affordable, but finding the right thing at the right time was a generally frustrating adventure. In those days, reproductions were mostly non-existent and typically out of my budget. And the stock items that could be purchased in local stores, whether towel bars or lights, usually seemed woefully inappropriate for my place: wrong style, wrong materials, wrong fit, and quality that was an affront to the building that had survived most of a century of serious abuse before I came along. So while I loved using salvaged antique materials, I knew that I could not rely on them completely, unless I had endless time and energy to complete the project.

The need was staggeringly obvious back in the 70s: old house renovators like me would be significantly helped with their projects if they could find well-made and stylistically appropriate materials, priced within reach, and easily purchased from a well-run and reliable company. That is the core of what I decided to do with Rejuvenation - we would make reproductions of old house things that would be every bit as good or better than the originals - and essentially identical to them.

What guidelines did we (and still do) use to create our products?

Same Materials as the Originals
Whether the original item was made in solid brass, cast-iron, aluminum, or something else, we don’t cut corners and use a cheaper material. In some cases, we use a "superior" material (say solid brass, when the original was cast iron).

Same Design as the Originals
We don’t build fixtures or anything else that are simply "traditional." No hodge-podge of vaguely historical looking stuff. We almost always start with original samples. These days we also use our significant collection of original catalogues to further document most items. Most new products we create respect the character and construction of the originals to a remarkable - some would say fanatical - degree. At the same time, we have the benefit of seeing how each item design has weathered and fared for 50, 100, or more years. Today, we have the knowledge about which designs worked best, and which were flawed. This helps us choose what to reproduce, and what flaws should not be repeated. For some items, minor changes are made to match modern standards (to cover electrical boxes, mailboxes a bit bigger, etc.). Sometimes, today’s electrical codes and UL testing require small changes like adding ground wires to some light fixtures. And, of course, today we make some changes based on green issues and technology: fixtures made for compact fluorescent, medicine cabinets with certified sustainably harvested wood.

Authentic Details
We go to great pains to get the details right, like using slotted head screws. We believe that the details help preserve the magic.

Built in the Same Way
We use the same techniques to produce the products as were used originally. Whether it was casting, spinning stamping, turning, wrought or hammered, we don’t seek out alternative ways to make our stuff. In some cases that isn’t feasible (sadly, some manufacturing methods have been lost to time). But our goal is always to do it the same way, while always being mindful of keeping costs within reason. Our metal finishes are done by hand, using the same techniques as were used in the past.

Why?

All of this begs the interesting question of why. Our focus on detail and authenticity comes with real costs. We could make things fairly similar to what we now make - but without the exacting standards we impose on ourselves - for less money - and some would never notice. Often, a design could be modified in a way that would achieve significant savings, but at the cost of its integrity. Or sometimes we are tempted to create a light fixture design we could easily make and would easily sell - but has no historic precedent. So we don’t build it. Changing these self-imposed standards is very tempting. Years ago, one of our better competitors went the other route - changing themselves from a historic lighting company to a "traditional" one. I understood why.

Naturally, I am often asked why we do this to ourselves. If I try to answer it simply and with a solid, convincing, and rational business argument, I struggle.

The simple rational answer is somewhat limited in scope. Home restorers who want to re-create authentic interiors are certainly well-served by us, and there is real value there. We believe that those customers deeply appreciate what we do. And if all our customers fit that description, no further explanation would be needed. However, that group does not describe all of our customers - it probably only describes a minority. Some of our customers don’t even own old homes, many others have different motivations - and often clearly don’t share the passion for authenticity or detail. And at the same time, more and more, we try to encourage all our customers to have fun. Some of our core home restorers approach their projects in a rather rigid fashion. And while creating a picture-perfect period interior is demanding and interesting, it is too slavish and daunting a challenge for most folks. Taking a cue from customers who we witness using our products in creative ways, we find ourselves encouraging many of our core customers to lighten up, be more eclectic, and less focused on creating museum-type interiors. So given that we like to encourage a more relaxed approach, given that we understand that many of our customers are not purists, then why can’t we "lighten" up ourselves? (Sorry, can’t resist a dumb pun.) Why should we remain so pure with our product standards?

We now go to my less rational answer, an answer that goes in various directions. First, we simply get joy out of bringing this stuff back to life. Being able to make a particular widget or light fixture, something that was perhaps common 100 years ago but simply unavailable since, and make the exact same thing available once again, is a royal kick. And then we get to witness the thrill when a customer who needed just that widget finds it. (If your reaction is "It takes all kinds." I understand.)

A second part of my less rational answer: So much of what we re-create had such wonderful intrinsic beauty, and bringing them back to life - just for their beauty alone, satisfies us. It is a joy for us to see our customers buy one of our lights for a loft, a restaurant, or some other use that isn’t connected to its stylistic pedigree. When our customers purchase something from us, but aren’t especially motivated by that reproduction pedigree, then I believe they are judging on beauty (or in some cases funkiness), our hand-built customization, and other values that we work to incorporate into our products.

And finally, the third part of my less rational answer: In the bigger marketplace, we live on the outskirts. At the end of the day, most Americans are going to go to the local big box retailer or chain hardware or lighting store to buy lighting and hardware. A small number of people want something better, different, whatever. They can’t stand the idea of going to those places and buying crap. But they don’t just want something better made or more handsome - they may want something more meaningful too. And the kind of thing we strive to provide is a light fixture hanging over the dining room table that could stimulate an interesting conversation, rather than embarrassment, if a guest asked about where it came from.

How do you put your finger on all this? You don’t, exactly. But many of the best things in life are difficult to explain, so I hope I can leave it there - without sounding too full of myself.

I have gone on quite a bit about us. But, of course, our customers are the other side of this equation. What makes sense here? What doesn’t? What motivates you?

Let me also ask a specific question, one that illustrates how the choices we make are sometimes difficult, and nuanced, when it comes to making things the way we have committed to do them. This is something we are actively debating right now. Our dedication to using original materials makes complete sense when you are comparing solid brass to plated steel. Brass doesn’t rust, can be re-finished 100 years later, and is a durable base metal when it is plated. No comparison. We use brass.

But when it comes to using cast-iron (which was typically used for porch lights - and what we use today) it is hard for us to argue that it is superior to aluminum. While durable and authentic, cast-iron does rust if the paint fails, and it is very heavy. The significant weight makes them difficult and expensive to ship. In addition, the larger fixtures require significant backing, a headache for the installer. Although not "authentic," aluminum is arguably superior in many ways. It is more durable. It is lighter, doesn’t rust, and it is also easier metal to cast and attain a high quality appearance. It is easier to machine. Aluminum fixtures would not likely be any more or less expensive. And once installed, it would be a rare person who could tell the difference.

And there are significant environmental arguments too. Besides the fuel savings derived from shipping a lighter product, I am told that aluminum is the most abundant metal in the earth’s crust. Plus there is no shortage of post-consumer aluminum that can be melted down (think beer cans or old storm doors) and then recycled into fixtures.

Given global warming, and the obvious advantages of aluminum, we may make this change. Is that what you would do?

All feedback will be appreciated.

Jim

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company, Social & Environmental | 1 Comment »

Historic Preservation, Green at Core

March 31st, 2008

Dear Readers,

When I started Rejuvenation in 1977 the business was all about recycling. Almost everything we sold was old. We salvaged stuff and then sold it to customers who were “recycling” old houses. Getting into the business was not a simple accident. The whole idea of re-use, of both stuff as well as old structures, was, and still is, something that energized me, and a reflection of my core values.

However with all the talk these days about sustainability, I have been bothered by a seeming disconnect when it comes to historic preservation. To me, saving and restoring an old house is a prime example of sustainability, at its core. But few in the historic preservation world talked about it that way. And my perception is that few old home renovators see themselves, simply by the act of owning and renovating an old house, as doing the “right” thing, like others do when they buy a Prius.

Is renovating an old house more sustainable than building new? This is something that has been debated, but few facts were available to back up intuitions. Now we know the answer, and it is a pretty darn clear yes. Another common preconception has been that the greenest new houses are better for the environment because they are more energy efficient. But not so fast - new research doesn’t back up that assumption.

Personally, I am thrilled that we now have research that backs up what in the past have just been intuition-based assumptions on my part. This new research comes from Don Rypkema, who has focused on the connections between green buildings, sustainability, and historic preservation.

Richard Moe, President of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, gave a speech in Portland, based in large part on Mr. Rypkema’s work. In his role as President of the National Trust, Richard Moe has been an influential spokesman not just for historic preservation, but for smart growth, livable communities, and now sustainable ones too.

I was impressed by what he said and borrow here directly from Dr. Moe’s speech. After his introductory remarks and a bit about the history of historic preservation in America, his speech focused on the connection between preservation and sustainability.

“… Some things haven’t changed: We’re still saving iconic buildings, ranging from the Pioneer Courthouse here in Portland to Philip Johnson’s Glass House in Connecticut. Our work is still rooted in a respect for history. But today, more than ever before, it is as much concerned with building the future as with holding on to the past.”

This concern with the future is at the core of the new phase that preservation is entering right now: As growing numbers of people are worried about climate change, the degradation of the environment, and our relentless consumption of energy and irreplaceable natural resources, it is increasingly apparent that preservation has an essential role to play in any effort to deal with the environmental crisis that looms over us. Because it necessarily involves the conservation of energy and natural resources, historic preservation has always been the greenest of the building arts. Now it’s time to make sure everyone knows it.

It’s all about sustainability.

Up to now, our approach to life on this planet has been based on the assumption that “there’s plenty more where that came from.” With our environment in crisis, we have to face the fact that there may not be “plenty more” of anything – except trouble. In the face of that realization, we’re challenged to find a way of living that will ensure the longevity and health of our environmental, economic, and social resources.

The latest report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was released a couple of months ago, and it is deeply sobering. The report states that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal” and is the result of human activities.

The United States is a big part of the problem. We have only 5% of the world’s population, but we’re responsible for 22% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, which are the leading cause of climate change. Much of the debate on this subject usually focuses on the need to reduce auto emissions. But according to the EPA, transportation – cars, trucks, trains, airplanes – accounts for just 27% of America’s greenhouse gas emissions, while 48% – almost twice as much – is produced by the construction and operation of buildings. If you remember nothing else I say tonight, remember this: Nearly half of the greenhouse gases we Americans send into the atmosphere comes from our buildings. In fact, more than 10% of the entire world’s greenhouse gas emissions is produced by America’s buildings. The current debate on climate change does not come close to reflecting that huge fact, but it’s clear that any solution to climate change must address the need to reduce emissions by being wiser about land use and smarter about how we use our buildings.

I’m not so naïve as to believe that preservation represents the way out of this environmental crisis. But I do believe that historic preservation can be – and must be – a key component of any effort to promote sustainable development. Indeed, preservation is sustainability.

The connection between historic preservation and sustainability is not a new concept. It’s something that many people in the preservation community have believed and talked about for many years. They understand that preservation is “the ultimate recycling.” As long ago as 1980, before the word “sustainability” came into widespread use, the National Trust issued a Preservation Week poster that featured an old building in the shape of a gas can – a reminder that reusing an existing building, instead of demolishing it and replacing it with a new one, is one good way to conserve energy.

Much has changed since that poster appeared almost 28 years ago. The stakes have gotten much higher. Climate forecasts, meteorological reports, population growth projections, rising energy costs, dwindling reserves of water and fossil fuels, even the daily news headlines – they all warn us that we can’t wait any longer for “somebody” to figure out what to do. The “somebody” we need is us, and the need is clearly urgent.

The challenge is to help people understand that preservation, by its very nature, is sustainability. To address that challenge, I want to share my views on preservation’s essential role in fostering development that is environmentally, as well as economically, sustainable.

The key phrase is “sustainable stewardship.”

The retention and reuse of older buildings is an effective tool for the responsible, sustainable stewardship of our environmental resources – including those that have already been expended. I’m talking about what’s called “embodied energy.”

Here’s the concept in a nutshell: Buildings are vast repositories of energy. It takes energy to manufacture or extract building materials, more energy to transport them to a construction site, still more energy to assemble them into a building. All of that energy is embodied in the finished structure – and if the structure is demolished and landfilled, the energy locked up in it is totally wasted. What’s more, the process of demolition itself uses more energy – and, of course, the construction of a new building in its place uses more yet.

Let me give you some numbers that will translate that concept into reality.

According to a formula produced for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, about 80 billion BTUs of energy are embodied in a typical 50,000-square-foot commercial building. That’s the equivalent of 640,000 gallons of gasoline. If you tear the building down, all of that embodied energy is wasted.
What’s more, demolishing that same 50,000-square-foot commercial building would create nearly 4,000 tons of waste. That’s enough debris to fill 26 railroad boxcars – a train nearly a quarter of a mile long, headed for a landfill that is already almost full.
Once the old building is gone, putting up a new one in its place takes more energy, of course, and it also uses more natural resources and releases new pollutants and greenhouse gases into our environment. When you see a construction crane on the Portland skyline, consider this: It is estimated that constructing a 50,000-square-foot commercial building releases about the same amount of carbon into the atmosphere as driving a car 2.8 million miles.
One more point: Some people argue that all the energy used in demolishing an older building and replacing it is quickly recovered through the increased energy efficiency of the new building – but that’s simply not true. Recent research indicates that even if 40% of the materials are recycled, it takes approximately 65 years for a green, energy-efficient new office building to recover the energy lost in demolishing an existing building. And let’s face it: Most new buildings aren’t designed to last anywhere near 65 years.

Despite these surprising statistics and many more like them, we persist in thinking of our buildings as a disposable – rather than a renewable – resource.

A report from the Brookings Institution projects that by 2030 we will have demolished and replaced 82 billion square feet of our current building stock, or nearly 1/3 of our existing buildings, largely because the vast majority of them weren’t designed and built to last any longer.

That much demolition will create a lot of debris. If we didn’t recycle any of the building materials, we’d be left with 5.5 billion tons of waste. That’s enough debris to fill almost 2,500 NFL stadiums.

How much energy will it take to demolish and replace those buildings? Enough to power the entire state of California for 10 years. On the other hand, if we rehabbed just 10% of these buildings, we would save enough energy to power the state of New York for well over a year.

Instead of focusing on generalities, let’s look at a specific building.

The Portland Armory has approximately 55,000 square feet of space, enclosed and decorated by a lot of stone and bricks and iron and wood. When you consider how much energy it took to extract or manufacture all those materials, then transport them to this site and put them all together, the total embodied energy in this building is the equivalent of more than 700,000 gallons of gasoline. If we assume the average vehicle gets about 21 miles to the gallon, that means there’s enough embodied energy in this building to drive a car about 15 million miles.

All of that energy would be wasted if this building were to be demolished and landfilled. It all comes down to this simple fact: We can’t build our way out of the global warming crisis. We have to conserve our way out. That means we have to make better, wiser use of what we’ve already built.

Anthropologist Ashley Montagu has said that the secret to staying young is to die young – but the trick is to do it as late as possible. All over the United States, people are showing that old buildings put to new uses can stay young to a ripe old age. If that’s not sustainability, I don’t know what else to call it.

Still, too many people just don’t see the connection. They don’t yet understand that preservation must be an integral part of any effort to encourage environmental responsibility and sustainable development.

The UN report that I quoted a bit earlier, for instance, doesn’t stress the importance of reusing the buildings we have. Similarly, most recent efforts by the green community place heavy emphasis on new technologies rather than on tried-and-true preservation practices that focus on reusing existing buildings to reduce the environmental impacts associated with demolition and new construction. The most popular green-building rating system, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED program developed by the U. S. Green Building Council, was designed principally for new construction – underscoring the fact that words like “rehabilitation” and “reuse” haven’t had much resonance in the green-building lexicon.

This emphasis on new construction is completely wrong-headed. All available statistics tell us clearly that buildings are the problem – but incredibly, we propose to solve the problem by constructing more and more new buildings while ignoring the ones we already have.

Here’s what we have to keep in mind: No matter how much green technology is employed in its design and construction, any new building represents a new impact on the environment. The bottom line is that the greenest building is one that already exists.

It’s often alleged that historic buildings are energy hogs – but in fact, some older buildings are as energy-efficient as many recently-built ones, including new green buildings. Data from the U.S. Energy Information Agency suggests that buildings constructed before 1920 are actually more energy-efficient than buildings built at any time afterwards – except for those built after 2000. Furthermore, in 1999, the General Services Administration (GSA) examined its buildings inventory and found that utility costs for historic buildings were 27% less than for more modern buildings.

It’s not hard to figure out why. Many historic buildings have thick, solid walls, resulting in greater thermal mass and reducing the amount of energy needed for heating and cooling. Buildings designed before the widespread use of electricity feature transoms, high ceilings, and large windows for natural light and ventilation, as well as shaded porches and other features to reduce solar gain. Architects and builders paid close attention to siting and landscaping as tools for maximizing sun exposure during the winter months and minimizing it during warmer months.

Unlike their more recent counterparts that celebrate the concept of planned obsolescence, most historic and many other older buildings were built to last. Their durability gives them almost unlimited “renewability” – a fact that underscores the folly of wasting them instead of recognizing them as valuable, sustainable assets.

I’m not suggesting that all historic buildings are perfect models of efficient energy use – but, contrary to what many people believe, older buildings can “go green.” The marketplace now offers a wide range of products that can help make older buildings even more energy-efficient without compromising the historic character that makes them unique and appealing. And there’s a large and growing number of rehab/reuse projects that offer good models of sustainable design and construction. We’re sitting in one of them right now: The Portland Armory is the first building on the National Register of Historic Places to receive Platinum LEED certification. I’m confident that it won’t be the last.

More recent buildings – especially those constructed between the 1950s and 1980s – pose a greater challenge. Many of them were constructed at a time when fossil fuels were plentiful and inexpensive, so there was little regard for energy efficiency. In addition, they often include experimental materials and assemblies that were not designed to last beyond a generation.

Today, these buildings make up more than half of our nonresidential building stock. Because of their sheer numbers, demolishing and replacing them isn’t a viable option. We must find ways to rehabilitate these buildings and lighten their environmental footprint while still protecting their architectural significance. This is a challenge that preservationists and green-building advocates must face together in the coming years.

I believe that climate change is the defining issue of our time – and will be for a long time to come. What’s at stake is nothing less than life as we know it on this planet. The fact that the threat is not immediate does not mean that it’s not urgent. The experts tell us we have no time to lose. The debate is over, the facts are in, and it’s time to act.
Today, most of the important and innovative work on this issue is being carried out by state and local governments and the private sector. Precious little leadership is being offered by the federal government, which isn’t even doing much to promote and coordinate fundamental research.

Because this issue cuts across every social, geographic and political boundary, we simply can’t hope to bring effective direction to it without strong national leadership. What we need is a federal effort, preferably at the cabinet level, incorporating a significantly strengthened Environmental Protection Agency and relevant parts of the Department of Energy and other federal entities. This new agency should be given a mandate that recognizes climate change as a threat to our survival as great as terrorism and that commits the nation to combating it with every resource available. It should be the environmental equivalent of the Department of Homeland Security.

One of the first and most important things that must happen is a thoroughgoing revision of current government policies that foster unsustainable development.

For decades, national, state and local policies have facilitated – even encouraged – the development of new suburbs while leaving existing communities behind. As a result, an ongoing epidemic of sprawl ravages the countryside, devouring open space, consuming resources and demanding new infrastructure. Look at almost any city in the country, and you’ll see new houses springing up in rural areas that are underserved by roads and public services – while in the urban core, disinvestment has left viable housing stock abandoned in areas where infrastructure is already in place, already paid for.

It makes no sense for us to recycle newsprint and bottles and aluminum cans while we’re throwing away entire buildings, or even entire neighborhoods.

This pattern of development is fiscally irresponsible, environmentally disastrous, and ultimately unsustainable. To replace it, we need federal policy that directs growth to existing communities. You’ll note I said “federal policy.” While land-use planning has traditionally been a function of state and local government, it’s an indisputable fact that where the federal government chooses to spend its money – our money – has a huge impact on local planning and development. We need federal policy that stops rewarding unsustainable development. We need policy that maximizes wise use of existing resources by enhancing the viability and livability of the communities we already have.

We have a choice: We can do nothing for a while longer – until the realities of climate change, the disappearance of irreplaceable resources, and soaring energy costs force us to take action. Or we can take steps now to develop a smart, sustainable development ethic and the policies that will support it.

Among other things, we need incentives to encourage reuse and energy upgrades in older buildings. Over the past ten years alone, historic tax-credit incentives have sparked the rehab of more than 217 million square feet of commercial and residential space – and in the process, saved enough energy to heat and cool every home in the six New England states for a full year. We must insure the continued availability of these tax credits, and expand their use in older buildings that are not necessarily historic but still re-usable. Equally important, we must provide similar incentives that will help private homeowners use green technology in maintaining and renovating their homes.

These federal actions should be complemented by steps at the state and local levels. Over the past few years, 29 states have enacted their own state tax credits to promote the reuse of historic buildings, and we need to see them adopted in more states, including Oregon. At the local level, we need building codes that allow flexibility and innovation in making existing buildings more energy-efficient.

Finally, we need to improve green-building rating systems to ensure that they recognize the importance of building reuse. Under the current LEED standards, for example, a new building can be certified “green” even if it’s constructed outside densely populated areas; this kind of development amounts to “green sprawl,” which is contrary to every principle of sustainability. Also, under the current LEED rating system, reusing 75% of an existing building core and shell is assigned the same value as merely using environmentally-friendly carpet.

The National Trust and others are working with the U.S. Green Building Council – at their invitation – to improve these and other points. It will take time, but I hope that we’ll eventually arrive at a revised LEED rating system that accurately reflects the environmental benefits of “smart” locations and building reuse.

These public-policy steps are critically important, but we shouldn’t wait for government to act. That’s why the National Trust has launched its own Sustainability Initiative.

In addition to advocating the new policies we need, our Initiative will work to refute some common misconceptions about energy efficiency in older buildings, and we’ll make our website a “best practices” resource for how to reduce energy consumption and use green technology in the rehab of older structures.

We’ll also take steps to integrate environmentally sound practices in the operation of historic sites across the country. Last week in Washington, the National Trust opened President Lincoln’s Cottage to the public. Just a few yards away from the Cottage, the Visitors Education Center is housed in a renovated historic building that is fully LEED-certified – a good example of how green practices and products can be employed in older structures without compromising their historic integrity.

Finally, we’ll continue to gather reliable data on the comparative energy costs of rehab vs. building new, and we’ll launch a major outreach effort to inform everyone – especially architects, developers, property owners and policy makers – about the benefits of preserving and reusing older buildings. As part of this effort, we’re investigating the feasibility of establishing the National Trust for Historic Preservation Green Lab here in the Pacific Northwest, the region that leads the nation in green thinking. Once we have funding for it, this office, to be located in Seattle, will provide direct technical assistance and support demonstration projects in selected communities, working in partnership with other organizations and institutions. I believe this is one of the most exciting and important initiatives we’ve ever undertaken, and we’re eager to get started.

Historic preservation has always sustained America. By protecting and enhancing the buildings, communities and landscapes that tell America’s story, preservation allows us to maintain tangible contact with the places where our identity as a nation was established and our character as a people was shaped. By helping us understand the process that made us who we are, preservation gives us the confidence to become who we can be.

Over the years, as the focus of our work has evolved, we’ve demonstrated that preservation is good for the pocketbook as well as the soul. Now, in the face of unprecedented climate change, we’re prepared to demonstrate that preservation is an essential tool for sustaining the environmental viability of the planet as well as the quality of life for ourselves and our children.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has long played a leadership role in the responsible stewardship of America’s past. Now we’re ready and eager to play a similar role in the sustainable stewardship of America’s future.

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company, Social & Environmental | 4 Comments »

What do you need?

January 29th, 2008

Hello Readers,

I want to touch base with all of you about how we are doing supplying your needs for old stuff. For example, what do we make that would be perfect for your needs if it were a tad smaller or larger? Do you have a style of house that you think we ignore? When you remodeled the bathroom, is there something that sticks out like a sore thumb that ruins the look you were trying to achieve? What could you simply not find anywhere when you tore out and replaced that 1970s kitchen in your 1905 house?

Our Minestrone Soup of Stuff

We are constantly considering what new products to develop. Many different ingredients are in the soup of ideas, needs, and realities, out of which we choose new products. The following list will give you an idea of how we guide ourselves:

Hard-To-Find
1. We are a specialty company. If an item is easily available at your local big box retailer, hardware or lighting store, and is affordable, appropriate, and reasonably good quality, we typically won’t be going there. We are all about supplying the well-made, unusual, and hard-to-find stuff needed for old houses.

Biz Reality 101
2. We love to create and offer nifty and authentic little items that are otherwise unavailable and are relatively obscure, and satisfy the needs and wants of others as anal as ourselves. That said, we are a business, with a payroll and a need for profit, so our tendencies must be tempered by only offering cool products that actually sell enough to justify their existence.

Authenticity
3. We get juiced by offering products with a pedigree - products originally designed and produced years ago - that we can lovingly re-create. Modern interpetations of old stuff probably have a place - somewhere else though. And we do understand that some of you care passionately about this - and many others don’t.

$$-$$$
4. Affordability is very important. Most of what we offer was at one time more or less mass-produced, although quality was typically excellent. We look for items that can be made using manufacturing techniques that will produce an excellent result without an exorbitant price. At the same time, we don’t cut corners on materials, using the same base materials as were used originally - solid brass, for example. While we love one-of-a-kind artisan items, they tend to be very expensive, and that is not what we are about.

Got Magic?
5. Some old stuff has a magic - is beautiful - and some is ho-hum. Sometimes ho-hum is okay, but we do look for stuff with a bit of magic and beauty.

Squeaky Wheels
6. We do learn from you - and our success has always depended on it. The beauty of a manufacturing company that sells direct like Rejuvenation is that we get direct and specific feedback from all of you about your needs and wants. Our whole reason for being is rooted in what we hear from you. We keep long lists of products that we are considering making. So if you make your needs known it is likely to be effective, even if you aren’t the first to suggest a particular widget.

Wish We Could Do It All…

I think all of us involved in saving old houses and buildings should be mindful of the big picture. At any date in the past, thousands of firms produced hundreds of thousands of hardware items, house parts, and lighting for old houses and buildings. Today there is a very healthy marketplace for old house products. Realistically though, Rejuvenation’s ability, and the ability of us and our competitors combined, to reproduce all but a tiny fraction of what was available when your house was built is probably the best we can hope for.

Looking forward to hearing from some squeaky wheels out there!

Jim

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company | 49 Comments »

Web versus Paper

December 5th, 2007

Hi everybody,

As I write this, we have a very active crew here at Rejuvenation working to produce our next printed catalogue. Our next catalogue will be smaller and very different, and I thought this blog would be a great way to share our plans, our reasoning, and get some feedback from all of you.

We have been printing and mailing catalogues for most of our 30 year existence. From the beginning, we strove to produce a catalogue that worked as an efficient tool for our customers. During those years we have learned plenty, and we have constantly been refining what we do.

Up until recently the following were all givens when we produced a catalogue:

The resource guide would present all or nearly all of the lighting we manufacture so our customers would be fully informed of the choice we offer. (Very easy to do in 1982 when we manufactured just over a dozen different fixtures, period!)
The catalogue would present detailed specifications so that most fixture scale and installation questions could be resolved without having to call. (In the early days we didn’t provide an 800 number and long distance was still seen as very expensive.)
We would present complete pricing for all the fixtures, including many variations that weren’t pictured, and for all the metal finishes and common customization.
We would present plenty of technical tips and extensive information on our custom options and our policies, in the hope of helping our customers make the best and most informed decisions, and, conversely, to help them avoid making costly mistakes.
We would picture all the different glass shades that we offer on our “shade pages” so that our customers had the ability to easily see all the choice available to them.

Today, much has changed both within the company and without, and change the catalogue we must.

Within the company, the biggest change is the size and sophistication of our product offering. Our core market - old houses - are incredibly varied and their needs are incredibly varied. So, to serve all of you better we have constantly increased our product line. Today, we offer many more fixtures in different styles, for different needs, in more finishes, and made out of more and different materials. And we have lots and lots of shade choices. And where once we only made lighting, now we offer builders hardware, drapery hardware, registers, medicine cabinets, and much more. It serves us and it serves our customers to offer lots of choice in a variety of styles and products - the needs of a Queen Anne house are different from a Bungalow, a Tudor Revival, or a Mid-Century Ranch. It doesn’t serve you well and it makes no sense for us to offer only what is the current hot style and forget the rest.

Outside of the company itself, the biggest change in recent years in the “landscape” we operate in will be no surprise to any of you blog readers - the growth of the web. No explanation needed here!

One other very big factor has guided us - our need to find ways to operate as efficiently and sustainably as possible, reducing our carbon footprint. Presenting our complete product line in our printed catalogue and mailing it to all of you has become increasingly unsustainable, expensive, and simply no longer viable. Our last resource guide - at 156 pages - is overwhelming to many customers, yet it is no longer a complete representation of our product line, and eats up trees at an alarming and unacceptable rate.

With great relief we have come to realize that today almost all of our customers are willing to use the web as an information tool (even though many still are unwilling to place an order on the website). While we hate to piss off those who don’t use or don’t like to use the web, the upside of the changes we are planning to make with our upcoming catalogue made the decision a near no-brainer. We will save trees, save on fossil fuel, and, in the end, serve all of you better.

What are we going to do? Our next catalogue will have a couple of big changes and some smaller ones. We will eliminate the eleven shade pages. We will include shade choice options near the fixtures on many pages. But don’t panic! On the website it will be easy to download a shade pages PDF for use by specifiers or any others who want to see the complete visual presentation. We also won’t have six pages of pricing and other detailed specifications, although most of the information you need will still be in the catalogue (and easier to find). Other areas of information will be more spare, and you will be often prompted to check the website for more complete information and so that you can review the complete product line. Instead of 156 pages, this catalogue will contain a more manageable 124.

I am excited about what this will do for the environment, but I am also excited about getting more of our customers actively using our website. Why? Because our website has incredibly useful tools that we simply cannot provide in the printed catalogue. You can actually see how different shades choices will look on the fixture you are selecting. With our Room Scale tool you can review how your fixture would look made to the length you are considering in a virtual room the same size as yours. (Perhaps I am prejudiced, but I think that is way cool.) And our “Lighting Wizard” can help you select fixtures based on your specific requirements (age of house, style, room type and size). And the website has lots of information and product not found even in the current 156-page catalogue, lots of room setting photos, and even customers’ photos of their own projects.

Finally, I want you to know that we will remain committed to providing the service you need. We aren’t cutting back customer service or designing one of those awful phone mail systems designed to prevent you from talking with a real person. You will always be able to call our folks and get your questions answered personally - hopefully with a minimum of heartache.

Are we doing the right thing in your view? Chances are, there will be some bumps. Let me know what you think.

Jim

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company | 48 Comments »

Way Behind the Times

September 24th, 2007

Alysa Rose, President
(and Guest Blogger)
Alysa Rose, President of Rejuvenation

When Jim began writing the Boss’s Blog last October he said that he would ask others to take a turn. I’m happy to do so. I joined Rejuvenation in 2001 as Marketing Director. Today I am honored to serve the company as President.

Prior to working here I was the VP of Marketing for a Portland-based company that develops and markets natural health care products to women. Lighting and Menopause are different industries. However, there were some common business threads - multiple distribution channels, socially responsible business practices, and strong brands.

Rejuvenation is a company I admired for a while both as a customer and a self-described student of socially responsible businesses. Jim and Rejuvenation are leaders in this community. So when I left my last job to take a break from hard work and baby-making, I set my sights on working for Rejuvenation some day.

That day came sooner than I expected when I ran into Jim at our Portland store. We had met briefly through a leadership workshop and reconnected. The timing was right, as the company was then in search of a Marketing Director. In 2005 I became General Manager and was promoted to President in December.

I’ve been really blessed in my life to work for some great companies. I choose to work at Rejuvenation because it feeds me in many ways:

I get to do challenging work. While we are a relatively small business in sales volume, our work encompasses manufacturing, direct marketing, and retailing.
I get to work with great people-we employ 200 people from 20 different countries with a vast array of talent. Among us (not me) are artists, musicians, athletes, and entrepreneurs.
I get to be part of goodness. We create goodness everyday. We employ people in meaningful work. We create beautiful products. We help our customers add long-lasting beauty to their homes and buildings. We support the preservation of old homes, buildings, and communities. We give back to the community (with cash donations, in-kind donations, and days of service).
I get to work for and with a guy who has demonstrated for thirty years that you can’t do all this good unless you run a damn good business. There’s no shortage of challenges and the rewards are plenty.

I’ve also been blessed personally. I am happily married to the love of my life, David. David has the awesome task of teaching U.S. History to 8th graders. We have two boys ages 11 and 8 and a Golden Retriever mix named Willie. We live in a 1925 bungalow and amongst lots of Rejuvenation fixtures.

Alysa, David, and the boys

Rejuvenation Ruminations

When I first came on board we had a slogan that we used primarily on local radio advertising: “The store that’s way behind the times”. I hated it and said so - not the savviest thing to do given that it was penned by our owner. To me, it evoked a stodgy, old business kind of approach. And Rejuvenation, known for our creativity and progressive work place policies, was anything but stodgy. Years later, I can see that I wanted to make my own mark in my new position. My bosses were generous enough to let me do it. We stopped using the phrase, but it didn’t go away entirely. Like some good slogans (and many bad ones), it stuck-with employees and customers, and with me.

I was reminded of it again when I was reading an op-ed piece in the New York Times by Stanley Fish. He wrote about good old-fashioned customer service. He compared the experience of buying a cup of coffee today (expensive, wait in line, learn the lingo, no free refills),with buying a cup just a few years ago (cheap, sit at a counter, friendly smile, coffee, cream, and sugar brought to you, free refills).

Anyway, the bells went off-and I reconnected to the slogan I had tried and failed to silence. “We are way behind the times” in how we strive to treat our customers. While we have many advanced technological tools, our relationship with our customers, vendors, employees, and community remains low-tech, high-touch and “human”.

Some examples:

We try hard to make sure that when customers call us they are greeted by a human being, not a recorded message. Yes, there are some times when we are unusually busy and you have to leave a message. In these cases a real live person calls you back.
We design our website and catalogues to be user-friendly. In other words, we try to provide you with the information and tools you’ll need to place on order. While many marketers intentionally drive business to the web and try to save money by making human interaction hard to come by, we welcome it. The more we understand about your project and your needs, the more we can help. The more we help, the happier you’ll be in the long run.
We often get personal, hand-written notes from our customers. It makes our day and takes us back to a time when folks made the effort to reach out in a more “hands-on” way. We have taken your lead and do the same-savoring the joy of both sending and receiving a hand-addressed note.
We hire smart, dedicated, entrepreneurial folks who have a passion for our products and our business. They provide the level of customer service that they would expect. They know old houses, they know our products, and they know how to help you solve the challenges that come with home projects.
When making decisions that impact customers (don’t they all?) we do what we call the “sniff test”. We ask ourselves, “If I were at the customer end of this decision, would it add up?” This is our compass.

Of course all this is not to say that we’re perfect. We’re human and very imperfect. In the last year we’ve made some decisions that don’t serve our customers, and in turn our business, very well. We are working our butts off to make improvements. I hope that you feel those improvements and will continue to offer us your generous suggestions as we strive to stay the store that is “Way behind the times”.

Posted in From Alysa, Guest Editors | 28 Comments »

Summer Rambling

August 8th, 2007

So I originally promised this blog would be mostly, but not entirely, about business. So far we have already covered a number of serious business topics and many of you have participated. However, in these dog days of summer I need a break from all this seriousness.

So Dear Readers, my subject today is our 1964 Silver Streak travel trailer, all 17′ of her. Before you old house people abandon this blog, recognize that I will be addressing the sometimes overlapping worlds of old house crazies and funky trailer crazies, so you just might want to hold on.

So how did W and I become trailer trash, and why are we so happy about it? Last summer, on a highway not too far from home, this funky old trailer appeared in a roadside yard with a small “For Sale” sign. We repeatedly drove by it for a month or two before either of us admitted to the other that we thought it looked cute. Most old travel trailers are trashed on the inside, and we weren’t up for a major project, so it seemed like a safe bet to stop one day and take a quick peek at the inside.

To our surprise the inside was in remarkably good shape. Original turquoise appliances and formica, beige bathroom fixtures, worn out but original fabric, no mouse pee odor, and just a few cracked windows and other signs of wear and tear.

We were, of course, hooked. Before long we were greasing wheel bearings and heading home with our not-so-shiny old trailer. We had already used the internet to research the history of Silver Streak trailers. Virtually unknow in comparison to the iconic Airstream, the Silver Streak Company had similar roots. With origins that predated WWII, these companies really took off when engineers who had been designing and building aluminum aircraft looked for new ways to use their expertise and that of the skilled workers from McDonald Douglas. Well-designed and well-built aluminum travel trailers started to emerge from a handful of different manufacturers in California.

We were lucky to end up with one of the best. I will quote one of the elderly founders of the Silver Streak Company whose comment was simple and eloquent. “Airstream built a fine trailer, but ours was better.” (Yes Airstream owners out there, I have found this bloging thing works much better if you stimulate conversation…) Anyhow, our funky trailer is very well built, and the remarkably good condition we found it in is a testament to that fact.

But of course, it did need some work…

And just like an old house, one small repair project begat another, and another, and another. However, the scale of a 17′ renovation seems to better fit my current appetite. For example, painting the entire interior consumed the two of us for about three hours. Most work we did was decorative - paint, new carpet and upholstery, drapes, and a coat of finish on the cabinets.

The trailer’s systems are refreshingly simple and most everything worked. Apparently, in 1964, appliance manufactuers had yet to figure out and implement planned obsolescence. It is so great to work with stuff designed for a lifetime instead of just a few years.

We chose to keep as much of the original character as possible and not over do the renovation. We didn’t want the trailer to be too “precious.” We wanted to use it! Some old aluminum trailer buffs like to polish (should I say buff?) the exterior to a brilliant shine. It looks cool, but is a ton of work to do and maintain. We thought no. So our trailer is a bit dull, has some little dents here and there, some not-too-noticeable water stains, and other signs of use that we haven’t erased. And we still have the bumper sticker that has lasted for decades “Give a Hoot, Don’t Pollute!”

We didn’t stay totally authentic though. A swamp cooler had been added years earlier, but had been built after they learned how to make appliances that only last a few years, and was in need of replacement. A swamp cooler (for those of you who live in more humid climates) is a poor man’s form of air conditiong (It is highly energy efficient.) that works well in dry climates. So I replaced it with a new one and it keeps us very cool and happy - the trailer is well insulated. Our only other addtion was a discreetly installed car stereo, complete with I-Pod input so we can have all our tunes on the road.

However, my preservationist tendencies are well-illustrated by my nemesis, the beige toilet. The toilet needed re-building. My experience with marine heads qualified me for the work, I guess. (It really wasn’t too bad a job, nobody had lived in the trailer for years and years.) I ended up frustrated by a problem sometimes faced by Mid-Century Modern renovators - plastic. A specialty fitting that needs to hold water pressure was cracked and I was stumped on what to do - and the manufacturer was long gone. So I re-installed the beige one (you can flush it with a jug) rather than admit defeat and purchase a shiny new white toilet. Luckily, travel trailers are usually parked near facilities.

I was thrilled to find a company serving funky trailer owners looking for all those hard-to-find parts - Vintage Trailer Supply. From them I purchased hub caps to match the old ones, plastic running light lenses that I thought I would never find, specialty weatherstripping, new aluminum propane tanks, jalousie window handles, a complete and authentically-designed new canvas awning set, and other cool stuff. Steve, the owner, has put together a very functional website with a lot of personality. He works hard to keep prices reasonable too. Steve, it turns out, runs the business out of Montpelier, Vermont and lives in an old house surrounded by lighting he has purchased from Rejuvenation.

I now realize this coincidence should not have surprised me much, since it is obvious that the worlds of old house crazies and old trailer crazies intersect all the time. From Steve I had also purchased a book on old trailers called “Silver Palaces” by Douglas Keister. I recognized Douglas’s name immediately, since Douglas is well-known in old house circles for his picture books on Bungalows, Cottages, and Victorians.

When I paged through Douglas’s book I happened upon a new Airstream Bambi trailer re-done in period style by Michael Ashford, another old house acquaitance. I first met Michael in the early days of the Arts & Crafts revival. Michael is a fine artisan who makes beautiful hand-hammered copper lamps and lighting. Check out his website.

Clearly those who are attracted to old homes and other old stuff can seamlessly spread their affection for things as varied as Victorian homes and 1950s trailers. And now many of our customers who were ardent Arts & Crafts enthusiasts and renovators a few years ago are now ardent Mid-Century modern enthusiasts and renovators today. (20 years ago I doubt very many of them would have predicted themselves in love with ranch homes today.)

What motivates this love of old houses and old stuff? A question with a many faceted answer, I would guess. For some it serves their need to be non-conformist, while at the same time the sub-cultures of old houses or old trailers or old whatever often encourage a lot of conformity. I would venture to say that some shared values are at the core. Certainly, the conservation ethic is a central part of it for many. “Recycling” an old urban house versus building a new suburban one has very positive environmental implications, both in terms of reduced use of resources and in enabling a lifestyle that is of less impact on the earth.

Your thoughts?

Jim

PS I told “D” (my daughter, for those who haven’t read my first post) that I was about to post the next blog and it would be about the trailer. Although she claims to like the trailer, she was horrified that I would be writing my blog about it. Of course, it hasn’t stopped me. Just wondering if she is right…

Posted in From Jim, Personal Background | 17 Comments »

Give us Feedback!

June 11th, 2007

Hi Dear Readers,

Early summer has got the better of me. Just not feeling inspired to write something informational, inspirational, or very clever.

Sales have been a bit slower than expected lately. “Business 101″ says I should be quiet about this fact, but I have promised you blog readers to be forthright and honest. While the company is strong and healthy, this slowdown makes me think it would be a good time to ask for some feedback.

Certainly we are feeling the pinch of the slowed housing market, and other friends in the restoration supply business say they are feeling it too. Nevertheless, for a business owner like me this prompts some fretting and soul searching. Are tastes changing and the products and styles we offer less in demand? Do we not reach the right people? What are competitors doing better?

I would love to hear from you and how it might relate to us. What kind of project are you working on? What inspires you to buy from us, or not? How easy or difficult to find working with us? Are you a purist about period detail, or not?

Any kind of feedback would be great. While getting beat up is never fun, it can be very instructive for us to hear the negatives, so I encourage that too. And I would appreciate hearing from those readers who are not customers. We tend to learn a lot about our customers. But we don’t know much about those who choose not to do business with us. We are always curious about them.

How do you feel about our prices? We regularly get many customers commenting that our prices are very fair, while many others complain that our prices are terrbily expensive and unaffordable. While we have no magic formula to drive down prices, it is helpful for us to understand your perception of our prices.

To those of you who do answer this call for feedback, let me offer my thanks in advance.

Happy Summer,

Jim

P.S. After a month plus of comments, I decided I needed to add this information. First, business has picked up some so I am not feeling so sorry for myself!

Second, I want to correct a possible mis-perception. At the bottom of the comments I just read a comment from a customer who had a small problem with a shipment. This person then said that given their experience and based on the comments of others, they might not do business with us again. Whoa! I specifically asked for complaints and thoughts about how to do things better and we have definitely got some - which is great. However, I now feel like I should share an important fact that should help restore perspective. Currently, as is normal for us, 98% of our customers rate the customer service they received as either good or excellent. Not perfect, and while tht number reflects our humanity, it also reflects the fact that we do darn well most of the time.

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company, Uncategorized | 104 Comments »

Made in America, or China, or What?

April 20th, 2007

Where does the stuff we make and sell come from? It’s more than a fair question. We do have a factory right here in Portland where we make the light fixtures and where the majority of our 230 or so employees work – that part of the answer is (sorta) simple. But the full and honest answer isn’t nearly so simple.

Let me explain one thing first. We have two classes of products. The vast majority of our offerings are “Rejuvenation Exclusives.” These are products that we have reproduced ourselves with our own tooling. We also carry some products (primarily on the web) that are made by other manufacturers. Those products are wide ranging, like the selection you would find in a typical retail store. Some are made in the US, while some are made in other countries.

This blog will focus just on our exclusive “Rejuvenation” products.

Lighting

A little history here will help. Around 1980 we started making light fixtures here in Portland. We did that by finding sources for the stock parts we needed (like wire, screws, and sockets) and then getting other manufacturers to make brass parts and glass shades to our specifications. We had brass parts cast and spun and stamped to our specifications. We had glass shades blown and pressed. In the 1980s there was still a fairly vibrant domestic lighting industry in the United States, and suppliers who catered to them. While most of the parts we purchased were of domestic origin, even then building lights was an international affair. I remember brass and steel pipe coming from Italy, sockets from Mexico, glass from Peru and France, and cast brass parts from Taiwan. We then did a variety of other processes here, including polishing, finishing, and assembly.

Since that time, what has happened in the residential lighting industry mirrors what has happened in many others. Essentially, the domestic (U.S.) lighting industry, and the suppliers who catered to it, are gone. One by one, we have seen our domestic suppliers go out of business. In 1980 there were still quite a few companies in the West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio area making lighting glassware. Just a couple are still in business. Same goes for almost all domestic brass spinning and stamping operations, among others.

We fought this trend (and still do), generally sticking with our domestic suppliers so that we could get the quality we demanded, even though that came at an always increasing premium (usually double the cost, sometimes three, four, or five, even ten times the cost of something similar from Asia.). However, as suppliers continued to go out of business and China ascended, our choices have narrowed. While at one time choosing a source in China was simply a tempting way to save money, today sourcing many of the parts we need is simply impossible, or close to it, elsewhere.

The good news is that the Asian sources have become increasingly capable of producing parts that meet our quality standards. We continue to find our way, but are certainly more dependent on parts sourced in Asia. Our favorite glass shade supplier in France has struggled for years trying to remain in business. They have literally “gone out of business” three times now over the last decade, only to be rescued each time by the French government – and are greatly downsized. We can’t fully depend on situations like that. We still source a lot of glass shades in the U.S., but here too we are in constant fear that our remaining suppliers will shutter their doors. There are some domestic sourcing success stories. For example, we still source many of our brass turnings right here in Portland, right in the same neighborhood as our factory.

Hardware

We source most of our hardware in Asia, primarily in China and India. We work diligently with the most competent suppliers we can find to create the best products and the best finishes. We provide the oversight not just for quality, but we are there too monitoring working conditions and environmental processes.

Much of our line is made in expensive wrought brass, a manufacturing process that produces superior products. If we tried to achieve this level of quality making the hardware here at home, the prices would be so exorbitant only the most wealthy would be able to do business with us. A boutique business serving just the wealthy is not something we have ever wanted to be. Even with our Asian sourcing, our products already don’t come cheap.

So the fact of the matter is that most of our hardware does not get made here, and much of it will come with those nasty little “Made in China” stickers. I realize that some of you get pissed off and feel ripped off when you see those stickers. While I am sympathetic, I also think you need to be realistic with your expectations. I hope this blog helps.

In Sum

Cloe, my 3-legged border collie, is now flipping her dog bowl, urging me to feed her and our other border collie, Jefferson, breakfast. This is a sure sign that I have sat here long enough. (Dogs, not blogs!!)

We work very hard to find the right path here that balances so many conflicting needs and interests. It is ever changing as the world economy evolves - and we keep adapting. I welcome your thoughts, suggestions, and criticisms.

Jim

P.S. Once in a while someone suggests naming the country of origin for each product we sell in our stores, catalogue, and website. I, too, thought that was something our customers might want to know. So years ago we did try listing country of origin in our catalogue for all our shades. However, that created a mess. We need to insure steady supply of our products, so we try to have multiple suppliers for many of our parts and shades to minimize the risk. While not typical, we sometimes move back and forth amongst domestic and different foreign suppliers. We did not want to appear intentionally deceptive, so we gave up the practice.

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company | 9 Comments »

Higher Prices?

March 7th, 2007

A few days ago I was inspired by an old house blog to take up a subject that I was not initially thrilled to focus on – recent price increases on Rejuvenation products. But upon receiving our latest catalogue, the folks at www.thisoldcrackhouse.blogspot.com pulled an old Rejuvenation catalogue out of their closet and did an analysis of how much prices have inflated over the last 10 years. The information was mixed, but the bottom line was that prices seemed to have increased beyond what one would expect if just indexed for inflation. Sadly, that fact is correct, mostly because of what has gone on in the last couple of years. With our last catalogue we had to increase prices more than we ever have before. Hardware increased the most, lighting less, but together the increase averaged about 10%. Ugh.

Anyhow, a discussion ensued amongst readers of the blog, speculating about what was going on. Was it greed, or what? It deserves an answer.

We are not gouging. We raised our prices out of absolute necessity and, frankly, with dread about the consequences. We have faced in the last few years a “perfect storm” of cost increases that have perfectly targeted my company in the most frustrating way.

At the root of it has been the cost of copper, which is the main ingredient in brass. In the last five years the price of copper has quadrupled. Quadrupled. Almost all our lighting and hardware is made out of solid brass. Glass has not been spared either. Almost all our light fixtures include some sort of glass, blown or sheet. Glass is essentially sand, and, sand is cheap. But the expensive “ingredient” in glass is energy, and you all know where those costs have gone lately. And as a direct sales company, the increase in fuel costs have affected us in many ways, incoming and outgoing freight in particular, with the cost of delivering our goods to our customers the most dramatically affected.

In addition, almost all commodities have gone up dramatically over the last couple of years, so the cost of paper for our catalogues and cardboard for our boxes have also increased sharply – well above the overall inflation rate. Others costs, labor, services, supplies, and so on, have increased more modestly, although many (certainly labor) have increased at a pace above the rate of inflation in recent years.

We have also had to deal with serious increases in the cost of providing health insurance for our 235 employees. In 2007, our provider’s rates went up 13% (pretty typical of the sort of increase we see year after year). More significant was the fact that with relative low turnover we have a higher percentage of employees qualifying for full-family coverage. That is driving our health care costs up a total of 29% in just one year without any real increase in the number of employees. Another ugh.

What do we expect going forward? World-wide copper prices have a history of dramatic swings. We expect the price to remain high but stable, so we are optimistic that no more large price increases will be necessary. Of course, we don’t really know.

We still remain committed to building our products just like they used to, out of the same materials as the originals. Solid brass hardware and fixtures are more durable and can easily be restored 50 or 100 years from now.

An interesting sideline story: After years of relatively low prices for copper, many fixtures at the low end became more routinely manufactured in solid brass. You’ll now see less and less of that at the big box retailers as those Chinese manufacturers are quickly retreating to plated steel, pot metal, or plastic.

We also intend to continue making our fixtures in the U.S. This has several advantages other than the obvious “feel good.” We can deeply customize what we offer and still deliver in very short order. We have excellent control of finish and quality. And when something goes wrong, we can usually fix it in very short order.

But the other side of the coin is sobering. By the time we pay competitive wages and benefits our cost of production labor is approximately 25 times – that is twenty five times – the cost of similar labor in China.

Raising prices as much as we have had to is no fun for us. Despite the many challenges, we are working hard to deliver value and still run this business righteously, and stay in business. We know our fixtures aren’t cheap. We understand that crappier, but temptingly cheaper, China-made versions of some of our fixtures are available elsewhere.

So we deeply appreciate those of you who save your pennies and purchase our products.

Hope this makes sense – I welcome comments and questions.

Jim

Posted in From Jim, Inside the Company | 31 Comments »

Rejuvenation Goes Carbon Neutral

January 19th, 2007

30 years ago I started Rejuvenation. As 2007 approached I was all too ready to celebrate the anniversary by dredging up and rehashing maudlin memories of our humble beginnings.

However, you lucky reader, will be spared. I was recently given the sage advice that making commitments focused on a better future is a much more interesting and substantive way to celebrate an anniversary. The advice to look forward rather than backward gave us the added impetus to actually accomplish some things we had been talking about for some time now.

To celebrate the anniversary we chose to go "carbon neutral." You’ve probably heard that term, and others closely related like carbon footprint and carbon credits. I didn’t fully understand what going carbon neutral actually meant until we dug into doing it, so I think it bears a bit of explanation.

We all have a carbon footprint. It’s an estimate of the impact of a person, family, or organization’s total impact in the creation of greenhouse gases – those that contribute to global warming. Primarily, it is measured by estimating total use of fossil fuels, whether through use of gasoline, heating oil, natural gas, or electricity.

The first step is to make that estimate. In our case we chose to include the impact of our factory and our two stores, plus the impact of employee travel, both for business (like jet travel) as well as the substantial impact of all the commuting that happens as our employees make their way to work. (By the way, you can easily estimate your family’s carbon footprint, just go to www.carboncounter.org)

To then go carbon neutral we "buy" carbon credits. In reality, we don’t actually buy anything in the normal sense. What that really means is that we agree to support and fund – through a donation of dollars on a yearly basis – projects that will have a positive effect reducing greenhouse gases in an amount equivalent to our company’s carbon output (footprint).

We chose to work with a 3^rd party, a non-profit who "sells" these credits to us. The Climate Trust provides us the service of helping determine accurate estimates, as well as identifying the most worthy greenhouse gas reducing projects. The Climate Trust is a no nonsense organization that has been recently rated as the very best of U.S. based organizations selling carbon credits. Sadly, some other providers have been known to sell carbon credits cheaply, which effectively allows some corporations to "green wash." Green washing is when corporations (for marketing reasons) try to appear more environmentally responsible than they arguably are.

Here’s the best part about carbon credits. Even though the commitment we have made is voluntary, it gives us an added financial motivation to reduce our carbon footprint as we go forward. In December we made a donation of $13,000, based on our 2006 carbon footprint. If our company continues to grow and we use more and more energy this cost will go up. However, if we can reduce our footprint, our donation will become smaller.

We can reduce our footprint in many ways, from simple things like making sure computers are turned off at night to retrofits that will make our buildings more efficient to heat. By their nature, such improvements make the company more efficient and usually will pay for themselves. We have done this kind of work throughout the company for years now and made good progress. Now, the added financial incentive based on our carbon neutral policy should help propel us further.

However, to bring discipline to that process we are actively working on an ongoing climate strategy program. Just today, we have settled on a new commitment: a 5% overall (measured against sales growth) reduction in our carbon footprint for both 2007 and 2008. In 2007 we will be focusing on (you guessed it!) lighting. We will be installing energy-efficient lighting in our factory and introducing more compact fluorescent lamping into our fixtures throughout our showroom displays. Meanwhile, we will be seriously looking at identifying and prioritizing other possible projects.

Given the overwhelming science behind the threat of global warming, we think making these steps are nothing less than what any responsible and moral corporation should be doing. But we also look at this issue as a business decision. We are not making these choices based simply on soft-headed altruistic tendencies. For us, doing this kind of work is the perfect example of the intersection of where doing the "right" thing is also in the best long-term interests of the company. We will be stronger competitively as we become more efficient. That advantage will become even more important as global energy resources become increasingly scarce and expensive. And, in the bigger picture, doing our part to help avoid potentially catastrophic social, political, and economic upheaval is simply smart business.

As always, your input is welcome.

Jim

PS - For those interested in such things you’ll be interested to know that the single biggest part of Rejuvenation’s carbon footprint is employee commuting, which represents over 1/3 of the total. That is followed by electricity, also about 1/3rd. Natural gas for space heating and factory processes is the next largest item, followed by employee air travel.

Posted in From Jim, Social & Environmental | 1 Comment »