It is perfectly legal. Your example is a good one. For example Disney or Six 
Flags will allow a greater percentage if they allow exclusivity to one brand.

Don't we as face painters do the same by asking to be the exclusive face 
painting at a festival? It is quid-pro-quo as I see it.

Gary 

-----Original Message-----
From: "sabrina" <[email protected]>
To: "Face Painting and Body Art Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: 1/31/2009 11:53 AM
Subject: [fpba-assn] Re: Diamond / Wolfe


All these writings are very interesting Erika and I think you are
being quite honest, but I can't help but thinking...

What Marcela and Heather did was probably in their right and I guess
they get to choose who goes to their convention and who doesn't, I
personally wouldn't want to go to an event that didn't include as many
vendors as possible so that I can get exposure to the latest and the
best prices that competition brings.  This action makes me wonder..
how do they pick their instructors?
However, a more important issue that I see here is this question.
Isn't Wolfe breaking Federal Trading Laws by requesting the
competition to be excluded?  In the example of Coca-Cola, wouldn't
then Coke have a contract to be the only carbonated brand in the event
and to exclude all other beverage competition?  What makes it ok to
exclude Diamond and not Kryolan or Mehron?  It just doesn't sound
right to me... Am I the only one that feels this way?

Sabrina


On Jan 31, 7:41 am, Erika <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have really enjoyed this discussion, although I'm not sure why.  I
> guess because we've all put our cards on the table and respectfully
> discussed both sides of the coin.  Here's my perspective for those who
> are interested in following along.
>
> For several years, I had been the only person selling glitter tattoo
> supplies at the major conventions.  This past May at Marcela's
> convention, we had competition from Glimmer Body Art.  I had a
> momentary feeling of, "how could they do this to me?" when I
> realized...There are a half-dozen companies selling face paint.
> Shouldn't consumers have the right to choose between several glitter
> tattoo companies?  Why should I be able to vend without competition
> when all of these face painting companies have to deal with
> competition?  Sure it hurt my bottom line, but it also challenged me
> to make my company better..to differentiate myself...to find new and
> exciting products.  This is good for us as a business and good for
> consumers.  People always ask me if they should be worried about
> competition.  I think that the more people (or businesses) there are
> offering a service or a product, the more people that will come in
> contact with that service or product.  The more people see a product,
> the more they want it.  The product becomes mainstream.  We do more
> business.  Just like the stuff that you own will expand to fill the
> space that you have to store it, the amount of consumers will increase
> to absorb the amount of products available on the market.  Business
> tends to find a natural balance when we don't interfere too much with
> it.  With such a small industry, most of us are friends (and
> practically family) so we try to find a balance between good business
> and getting along with everyone.  Unfortunately, sometimes you can't
> do both.
>
> I completely respect Marcela's and Heather's decision about Wolfe/
> Diamond.  It costs a LOT of money to run these conventions.  I would
> say near to $100,000 just for the hotel portion and then a ton more
> for marketing and promotion, paying instructors, etc... If you do the
> math, you'll see that attendee registrations do not cover this
> amount.  Vendor sponsorship makes conventions possible and provides
> the organizers with a very meager salary for a year's worth of work.
> The convention organizers are not making thousands of dollars from
> these conventions.  The sponsorship that Wolfe bought was triple the
> price of just buying the booth space without the additional
> advertising and clout of being a sponsor.  Just like the Pepsi/Coke
> situation, I think they totally earned the right to demand a degree of
> exclusivity.  Since they are two totally different products...It's

[truncated by sender]

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Face 
Painting and Body Art Association."

This is a PG-13 forum dedicated to the discussion of Face Painting and Body 
Art.  This group is provided for the benefit of all and as such is not 
moderated. Our goal is to promote open and unrestricted communication between 
people interested in face painting and body art. We hope that you will be 
courteous to others and try to stay on topic.  You are free to offer products 
or services related to face painting as well.  
Please address concerns with the original poster before contacting the 
management.

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fpba-assn
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to