Expensive Rods...

[Flysmallie]

BTW, I have a ross flystick that I use for smallie fishing and tossing big streamers for trout. It works pretty well for me!

I like the flysticks, seem like good rods and they get a lot of good reviews. It was on the shortlist just a few weeks ago when I was looking at rods, went with a Redington Predator because I got a smokin deal on it.

I also have an older Echo 3wt that you couldn't pry out of my hands. I'll pull out the Scott if I'm feeling snobbish.

[Mitch f]

But, how will people know how good you are if you don't have a winston or sage?

My first trip to the white river in AR was an eye opener. I was walking out on the Norfolk after a very successful trip, when several guys asked how I was doing. I let them know what was working, but I don't think they paid much attention because they were too busy looking to see what kind of rod I was using. They were all decked out in simms gear and each one had a telescoping wading stick along with a million doodads attached to lanyards! They said they hadn't caught much that day, and owning the best boat, fly rod, vest, waders, etc. means nothing if you don't know how to use it. The most important piece of equipment when it comes to fly fishing sits in between your ears.

BTW, I have a ross flystick that I use for smallie fishing and tossing big streamers for trout. It works pretty well for me!

Nice fish, looks like a cottonmouth on your blog

[Bill B.]

This old article from a Harvard Law School journal, isn't about fishing rods, but it pertains to the general topic of price structure. Some of you may remember the story of how Bausch & Lomb was charging four different prices, ranging from $3 a pair to $70 a pair, for exactly the same contact lense:

leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/277/Delacourt,_John.html

(Edit: You have to cut-and-paste the entire URL in your browser. The comma breaks it up on the screen.)

Actually, that practice isn't terribly uncommon in consumer sales. For example, Walmart used to carry an Atkins low-carb line of chocolate candies from Russell Stover. It also carried, and still carries, a sugar-free line of Russell Stover chocolates. A bag of Atkins chocolates sold for about $2.49. A bag of sugar-free chocolates sold for $1.69. The weight of the bags was identical, the chocolates were identical, the nutrition list was identical. The only difference was the color of the bag, and the name. I verified all of this through the Russell Stover headquarters. The RS person explained to me that RS could charge more for the Atkins-labeled product because some people associate low-sugar with diabetic and didn't like the association. They were willing to pay more to avoid it.

Students in marketing classes learn that, for some products, if you want to sell more, lower the price. But for other products, RAISE it.

[dave potts]

I think flyrods are just like most everything you buy. If you plotted price vs. quality (price on the x axis and quality on the y axis) you would find a linear relationship up to a certain price and then the graph would start to level off. That is, up to a point, you get better quality the more you pay but then the quality only increases by a small amount even as the price goes up and up.

The trick, therefore, is to find the spot on the curve where the slope changes and buy there. At that point you are getting more bang for your buck but avoiding paying a lot more money for a small increase in quality.

Getting back to flyrods, a lot of that high cost for Sage is their marketing costs. You can also save a bundle on flyrods by buying used rods online. Al, I've looked at those Ross rods at fly shows and agree they are darn nice rods for the money.

Dave

[Al Agnew]

A good angler can catch fish on really cheap gear. But, up to a point, as Dave just said, you can really tell a difference in things like rods, and I will contend that the good angler will catch a few more fish on a rod that's in Dave's "sweet spot" where the slope changes than he will using a super cheap rod. Why? Because it's easier and more comfortable to make good presentations.

And that isn't the only thing to consider. It's simply more pleasurable to use a good rod. Same as paddling a good canoe or fishing from a good boat. But I agree with Dave, at a certain point you've reached pretty close to the apex of "good", and from there on it's just more expensive without making a big difference in your pleasure and ease of use.

[dgames]

This thread reminds me of this gem from last year.

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7795583/a-new-fly-rod

[hoglaw]

I definitely agree with Al. I am very picky about high quality rods and am willing to pay good money for good components. When you price every component that goes into a rod, you quickly learn about diminishing returns. I can put a $35 set of guides on a rod. They are very good guides...equivalent to what you would find on an off the rack Loomis G3. I could step up and put an $80 set of titanium guides on a rod. They will weigh less, and theoretically perform better. But at that point, the extra marginal return is just not worth the extra $45 bucks to me.

Same deal with blanks. I did a good job spiral wrapping a cheap blank with a pistol grip. It's a short rod made for flipping spinnerbaits in tight quarters in the White River Refuge oxbows, or at least that's what I had in mind when I built it. It is a great sammie rod too. If I had stepped up and put a better blank with that outfit, it would perform much better, but it accomplishes what I need it to accomplish.

Now for finesse fishing, I used a much higher quality blank on a rod I absolutely love. That blank set me back about $60, and had I used a $30 blank, I would have noticed a huge difference. I could step up to the high modulus model with the same specs for probably $90 and it would be a dream rod. The next step up from there would be like an SCV or something, and that would be close to $200. It would perform "better," no doubt, but the extra performance just wasn't worth that much more money at the time when I have a lot of other application specific rods I want to build.

The law of diminishing marginal returns is huge in fishing rods. I demand high quality on most of my rods and I'm willing to pay for it, but I don't need the best money can buy and I have zero need to show off a brand.

[Jason R.]

Anyone tried a Batson Rainshadow blank- the RX7 one? I was thinking about making my new 6wt out of one- they are kinda pricey- about 100$, but they have decent reviews and they look pretty good- I want the green one, I think I'd go green wraps with turquoise accents, green struble u-15 aluminum reel seat and a custom handle with some of those cool green cork accents in there... that's what I've been thinking about during Admin Law class anyway, but I don't want to build a cool looking rod with a blank that I do not like. I also am looking at TFO blanks- I honestly just don't like the way they look- bad colors and that huge label, or if I could find a good price on a sage VT2, that would be awesome. Alright, back to Admin Law...

[Outside Bend]

A lot of the difference comes from labor as opposed to materials- a rod wrapper stateside is going to expect better compensation than a rod wrapper overseas. Add in the costs of R&D, ad space in every fishing mag, posters, banners, Hardy girls...it all adds up. It's not necessarily so that high-end Sages and Winstons are of dramatically higher quality, they're just more pervasively promoted in the sport than the St. Croix's, TFO's, Batsons, etc.

[hoglaw]

I have not but I'd like to do some work with rainshadow blanks in the future. I've heard awesome things about them. I'm really high on MHX myself, but haven't used any of their fly blanks.

I'm a little troubled you feel the need to pay attention in admin law, or that you even signed up for it in the first place.