Orvis cutting workforce, discontinuing catalog among other changes.

dudemanspecial

dudemanspecial

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
881
Location
Westmoreland County
This is ominous for the fishing department (especially the bamboo rod shop niche) but can't be classified as shocking. I mean how many new rods and reels does one need annually, I could see them contracting rod and reel offerings more than consumables like lines, waders, leaders, flies. Forget brick and motar, all internet. The higher margin apparel and such probably will be expanded not contracted, think LL Bean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRB
I haven't gotten a catalogue from Orvis for years, despite having bought a fair amount of stuff from Orvis.

I am sorry that 8% of the workers are going to lose their jobs.
 
Sad how the internet has changed business models.
But, the internet has opened the world to my fishing shopping.
Brick and mortar stores are a thing of the past.
I personally have not been in a fly shop in years. I have patronized Pennsylvania and NY fly shops over the net over that time.


“There is only one reason in the world to go fishing: to enjoy yourself,” he told The Times in 1992. “Anything that detracts from enjoying yourself is to be avoided.” L. Perkins

​

 
Last edited:
There is a lot of competition these days for rods, reels, and fly fishing stuff and with the internet, you can find products similar to orvis items at cheaper prices. I know I seldom bought anything at the Orvis outlet store in Lancaster.
 
greywolf said:
There is a lot of competition these days for rods, reels, and fly fishing stuff and with the internet, you can find products similar to orvis items at cheaper prices. I know I seldom bought anything at the Orvis outlet store in Lancaster.
Click to expand...
There is definitely a lot of competition.

And how about the size of the fly fishing market? Are more, less, or about the same number of rods, reels, etc. sold now compared to the 1990s?
 
Perhaps I am living in the past but paying a thousand dollars for a Orvis rod is absurd. Any one who thinks they need to spend that kind of money to catch a trout is unreal .IMO. Yes quality tackle is needed but? I sold Orvis equipment for over 35 years and respect they have quality equipment that years ago dominated the market. In todays world we have a lot of choices and many will work just fine leaving a lot of cash in your pocket to boot.
On the other side Orvis was the oldest catalog company in the world and it was always great to window shop so to speak. I agree that buying online is convenient and can often be the best price. However buying fly tying materials online is not desirable. I need to see what I am buying to accomplish what effect I want my fly to have. Also dye lots can vary to a large extent. When going to a out of town stream it can be help full to stop at the local fly shop for current info. It used to really tick me off when some one would come into the shop and we would spend time with them explaining a rod and even letting them cast them then to see them on the stream a week later with that rod. Yep I bought it online!
 
I wouldn't be surprised if the changes are driven by sales performance in other categories besides fishing gear. "Lifestyle" goods and clothing are trendy and the consumer is fickle. One year can be a banner sales year and the next a struggle. The article also mentions changes due to work-from-home and such.

To be honest, I've never personally heard of, seen, or met anyone who purchases Orvis products who is not also a fly fisherman.

As for the catalogs, I can't believe that anyone still publishes and mails out physical catalogs. Dumping yearly and seasonal print catalogs is 10-15 years late to the game IMO.
 
We sold a lot of women'.s clothing and most was dressy so I do not think they were for ladies going fishing, Probably 20 percent on most days. We also sold Pendleton ladies dress suits seasonally. This was years ago when ladies working in professional offices dressed exceptionally nice. At Christmas time this was 30- 40 percent of our sales.
 
PennKev said:
I wouldn't be surprised if the changes are driven by sales performance in other categories besides fishing gear. "Lifestyle" goods and clothing are trendy and the consumer is fickle. One year can be a banner sales year and the next a struggle. The article also mentions changes due to work-from-home and such.

To be honest, I've never personally heard of, seen, or met anyone who purchases Orvis products who is not also a fly fisherman.

As for the catalogs, I can't believe that anyone still publishes and mails out physical catalogs. Dumping yearly and seasonal print catalogs is 10-15 years late to the game IMO.
Click to expand...


This makes a lot of sense. If you go to the website, it’s very clothing focused, and essentially geared towards the same market as Bean and, to a lesser degree, Barbour.

Also, if 8 percent is 50 people, that puts the remaining workforce at 575, so still a solid employer in the green mountain state.

But the whole Helios rod rollout indicates a certain amount of screw the customer for cash dynamic at play.

My cousin bought one of the early Helios models, and broke it a few years later. When he sent it back through a dealer, he learned that the model he had was rebranded to a more expensive model and his price point product was inferior to what he had.

Bottom line: he got a new tip that matches his actual rod, but his rod at the price point where he got it no longer exists.

In short: we made a porche with an Audi price tag, so we changed the name of the porche and replaced that brand with an Audi (or maybe a Volkswagen).
 
I skimmed an article earlier today that included two interesting claims:
1. The pandemic driven growth in fishing license sales has ended, returning to the prepandemic gradual decline.
2. The majority of the job cuts were focused on catalogs and brick & mortar locations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top