Don't get the point of phal farm pics. Competition? Which country? (Was) this top secret?
Mike

China.
Competition perhaps but there has to be a market!
I have a feeling that what will be found is another mass market producer that will dump plants as throwaways during different seasons of the year.

Here is a link that might be useful: Chinese grower

Impressive.

Unfortunately, I imagine many hybridizers won't be able to compete -- between the much cheaper labor and gov't subsidized businesses, China'll be able to flood the market with cheap plants. Downside for the buyer could be less variety/fewer new hybrids.

Actually I think orchid consumers owe a debt of gratitude to the companies all over the world for propagating orchids that we can afford to buy. The ability to harvest seeds from endangered species and make sure they survive in situ, is helping keep down the illegal trafficing in orchids. How else would we be able to get Phrag. kovachii seedlings and crosses since it's discovery?

Brooke

Most of the big hybridizers here in the States already send their seed over to companies in Taiwan, Thailand, etc to have them flasked and grown to compot size or larger since labor and energy costs here can be prohibitive in a highly competitive market. This has become a very common practice in the past decade or so.

Many smaller orchid growers used to have some "bread and butter" orchids that they sold to subsidize the lower volume, rarer orchids they sold to collectors.

Many of these smaller growers cannot afford to compete now because of the good news / bad news situation with the large volume growers. Yes, they are affordable and are the entry point for many hobbyists these days. But when the hobbyist is ready to move on from "any old orchid" to something a bit more sophisticated, they are less available. Some have simply gone out of business, others have decided to retire early.

In our area, it is Trader Joe that has taken center stage. They actually have pretty good orchids and don't keep them past blooming. When they opened, there were two immediate effects. First, our local grower had to stop selling at Farmer's Market, nobody was buying. Second, the orchid society show and sale made much less money than before.

terrestrial_man, the site you linked is not a grower. It is a website where everyone can subscribe for unlimited picture space.

I am pretty sure the pictured company is a privately owned "small' business. No one bans small business from new technologies. To be a successful entrepreneur, everyone must innovate. Competition is necessary for customers' benefit.

I personally think orchid shows should not be a primary source of income. The reason I post this is that I am so socked at the price tag of some of the lovely plants. Check out my topic on Fragrant Phal, Catts, etc. However, I think the large vendors might already be doing just that, like cjwatson pointed out. I remember a TV show says that a dress shipped out of Bangladesh costs only $4, and WM sells it at $50.

I can see the good side to this - it introduces more people to orchids, and the more people that get growing, the more people will end up getting into the hobby (I'm sure a lot of us started with box-store phals). Once you get interested in the hobby enough, these sorts of mass produced NOID phals will be of no interest to you any longer. Instead, you'll seek out those smaller growers, so in the end, this movement will eventually help out these specialty vendors. Personally I see them competing on pretty much different markets - small growers cater to a different niche than big mass-growers - having more mass growers leads to an increase flow of people into the small-grower niche, which is a good thing...it will just take some time.

The bad thing is that as richard points out - the 'bread and butter' orchids that specialty vendors sell to make ends meet will lose demand, so on the short run this will make things much tougher for these small businesses. :S

For anybody who's interested, the book *American Cattleyas* by Hackney traces the breeding of catts from England, to the US, to FL and CA in the US, then to HI and finally to Taiwan.

I found it fascinating -- each time the primary location of hybridizers changed, whether for historic or other reasons, the *kind* of orchid being bred changed as well.

I'm sure you could write the same kind of history about phal breeding as well, since the kind of phal being bred was revolutionized when breeding went to Taiwan.

There are a number of small, very specialized hybridizers still around in phals. Don't know whether their "business" is just there to back up their hybridizing efforts, but these guys rake in the awards by the handful. Examples are Sedona, Olympia and Orchid Konnection. All three have awards up the kazoo, and seem to specialize in a certain type.

They offer a small number of very select plants. Don't know whether their customers are other breeders, or even whether the orchid business is their means of support. But they're out there selecting and breeding some fabulous plants.

I was lucky enough to be able to buy a few plants from Sedona and OK this year. I can recommend them for exceptionally beautiful selected (and awarded) phals. Sedona's prices are very competitive, IMO.

Phoenix, Bedford, and another I think it's called D & B (Woodson)are in the same category of boutique hybridizers of phals.

Then there's Baldan's and Orchidview, I think they are bigger, but still very select plants.

Whenever there is mass demand for something, it becomes "commoditized" -- ie producers have to compete on price as other producers try to cash in on a good thing. As several people pointed out, it is good for the consumer.

The boutique breeder is far from dead, tho, since there are always *some* who will pay more for quality. That's what keeps the people who sell $3000 sheet sets in business.

Most of the South American species and hybrids are coming from nurseries there doing their own flasking and seedling raising for consumers here. Most of these are being sold to nurseries here, who grow them on and sell to us. Most of my catt species have originated in South America and I'm grateful to be able to buy them here without breaking the bank, or almost not breaking the bank.

Brooke

I don't know why you call it competition. With whom? Who cares?
The main thing in this business of mass marketing orchids is quality breeding. The same tenets that made for award quality flowers of the past have to applied to today's breeding program. Fine flowers with great shape, and hardy growth. I'm opposed to creating simply "junk" plants just to fill shelves at your local big box store or supermarkets. Some plants are not even labeled. This is bad. Every effort should be made to sustain the RHS and the AOS awards system. These mass market growers have a responsibility to create the best hybrid or species they can. Also create diversity.

I have to agree with Toyo... I'd much rather pay a little more for a genetically well-bred, healthy plant than see them everywhere, cheap, but not able to survive very long because they are poorly bred and have weak immune systems...

I've been a canine breeder for many, many years... and it's horrible when the market is flooded with junk... poorly bred animals with health problems and huge vet bills, sold for cheap at every pet store and in every newspaper...

It saddens me that money is more important than the genetic well-being of our plants and animals....

Great analogy, jodik
Puppy mills. Quantity doesn't justify quality. Yes, there are thousands of puppies churned out with all sorts of genetic and congenital diseases. It's cruel and inhumane.
The world is flooded with crap and slip-shot commodity driven inferior products. The Mattel toys that have been recalled from China because of lead paint. Computers who's batteries all of a sudden fry and cause fires. Americans have become zombies to Walmart. Cheaper, cheaper, cheapest. And for what? We have a throw-away society. If something breaks, just heave it out. Not only does this cause more pollution, but it says something about our own psyche.
So we get cheaper orchids. So what. So more people are "exposed" to orchids. So what? In the real world marketing, it's not all about making things faster and cheaper. Yes, it's a segment of business. But in the world of agriculture, just as in all product production, it's all about making a better plant. Especially ornamental horticulture. Fortunes are made on developing the next "it" plant. Roses, marigolds, tulips, day lilies etc. There is a concerted effort for R&D. It's the fundamental tenet of all business. You "beat" the competition by inventing something new. This is why Detroit is dying. And the Japanese are winning. You can still keep costs down. But you have to invest in the future. I'm not seeing that in these giant production line orchid factories. Okay, so you get a $4 phalaenopsis at Lowes. Big deal. It dies a month later. And you throw it out and buy another one. It dies. What have you learned? Nothing. And people will come to this website and cry about how to save their sad little orchid. Or just go out and buy another piece of junk just because it's on sale. Again, it's part of American consumerism. And it's wrong. We are not taught to respect quality. And it doesn't cost that much more for quality. But the moral responsibility to uphold it. In a sense, these giant orchid factories are cutting their own throat in the end. Yes, more people will become exposed to orchids. And like me and millions like us, will become orchidphiles. They will become bored and tired of the same white or lavender phalaenopsis. The same phalanenopsis type dendrobium. The same cattleya clone you can find on Ebay a thousand times over. And then what? These people will go elsewhere to fill their desires. And the giant orchid factories will become obsolete. Unless they invest in creating a better plant, a better flower, a better everything. Modern propagation of orchids is not a new thing. It's still really the Knudsen formula. And the cloning process developed by McDade and then perfected by Vacherot and Lecoufle hasn't changed either. All that has changed is efficiency. And on a larger scale. But what made Armacost and Royston orchid royalty was the first use of Knudsen's formula and in-vitro culture. What made them even greater was B.O. Bracey's new ability to create more and more diverse hybrids. And the aim of Armacost and Royston was to create the very best orchid, at a reasonable cost. Technology created a means to expand creativity. That is aim of for all business. For all people. Through technology we have a responsibility to create a better world. Not a cheap disposable one. There in lies the true competition. Even now, monsters are being made and sold. Plants that are over-cloned. The use of too much growth hormones. These plants are junk.
The consumer will automatically demand better goods. Flowers with wider petals, overlapping shape. Cardboard substance. Vibrant colors. Taller and stronger stems. More and bigger flowers per stem. Strong root growth. Wide thick leaves. Disease resistance. Then they will join an orchid society and display their plants and enter for a ribbon or even an AOS award. There's no stopping the orchid bug. It's our disease. The question is, can these orchid companies keep up?

To go back to that same analogy for a minute, we have the technology to create a better dog... genetics are no big secret, and anyone can do the research necessary to create a better, healthier, stronger animal, or to maintain the highest level of genetic quality... we've used technology to keep our kennel moving in a forward direction for the past 20 years. We'll never be rich, but that's because we refuse to flood the market with garbage... the only thing we'll take to our graves is our reputation for having the highest quality working dogs available.

If technology can help create a better dog, it can surely be utilized to create better plants! And healthier, stronger plants mean that more people will have an easier time caring for them, thus making more orchid lovers and keeping them interested in growing!

I gotta tell you, I'm not having an easy time with my "disposable" Phal, and it's not exactly endearing me to the orchid! I was a garden nut before I got the Phal, so this isn't going to deter me from trying to grow orchids, but think of the thousands of people that either buy or are gifted with these inferior plants... many of them will be disheartened by the demise of their plants, and will probably not seek to obtain another orchid or information on growing them...

I happen to know that it pays to seek out quality and to do the research necessary before purchasing... but how many other people actually do this for an orchid? I can tell you from experience that not a lot of people do this before buying puppies, let alone a plant!

My point is... Quality Before Quantity! In the end, that will win the day! And the consumer!

I have real mixed feelings about the explosion of orchids and mass cloning. But one thing I do think is that the plants as they are shipped from the original grower are in fact healthy and quite viable. The damage gets done in the shipping and handling, and particularly in the retail sales. A pretty good plant can be got by going to a big box store that has a big orchid section on the day that the new plants arrive.

I have to agree with richard on this -- I've seen the fresh plants arrive, and they're healthy. There's no analogy to puppy mills.

It's just not possible to maintain plants for a long time in that primo condition given the help available. We often see just the remainder of a shipment that may have come in 4 months ago and sits and sits because it's too ugly to sell now and they aren't ready to write it off yet.

I got a huge, gorgeous gardenia in a 16" pot, fresh and beautiful right off the truck one year, dozens of buds and flowers (near Valentine's day).

The "phal promo" plants at HD that were mentioned here around Tksgvg were healthy and had great roots, even tho I got there two or three weeks after the promo started.

They're not necessarily genetically inferior, either. I'm convinced I saw some untagged but awarded phals among them-- Baldan's Kaleidoscope 'Golden Treasure' AM/AOS and Newberry Parfait (also AM/AOS *and* AM/RHS, and apparently the most popular orchid in France) among them. Those aren't the *newest* orchids, that's all, but they're not "genetic junk" either.

No way is it all junk.

Toyo, the "repair it" field (including shoe re-solers) used to be filled by low-wage workers, so it was possible to keep and fix broken things. Now, it's much harder to find good and honest repair-people. Is this better or worse? Depends maybe on whether you want to work for such low wages fixing things, or like to get scammed trying to get something fixed.

I don't think it's a simple moral question at all. We need to be realistic about how easy it is to get or find knowledgable help. A poor electrician "repair man" can set fire to your house, too (I know, I had one just a year or so ago) Also had a "handy man" at $80 an hour who never used a level.

Purchase decisions are made in the real world, not in Camelot.

I do agree that if you get a fresh plant, more often than not, it's healthy and wonderful! And I agree that un-trained retail personnel do more harm to the plants than anything!

What I'm saying is... and this does not apply to all growers... that some growers are more interested in units sold than in creating a healthy well-bred plant... and this is obvious when you get into the modern day mums and other plants that are sold mainly by flower size and color and shape... hardiness doesn't seem to be a concern anymore... only pumping out more disposable-buy-it-again-next-season plants!

Our society is more interested in filling pockets with cash than in leaving behind a legacy of solid genetic strength and health... and this applies to pets as well as plants!

Hi, jodik. I can't disagree that virused and sick plants should not be mericloned. Sometimes they can be bred because the virus is not necessarily passed on in seed, and all diseases are not hereditary. People expect and deserve to get an honest product.

But what constitutes good genes is a value judgment. A human being with human needs is going to be making it. And this will include the need for money to maintain life.

If you read *American Cattleyas* by Hackney, it's clear that what became good form and good genes for awards in catts was heavily influenced from the beginning by the market.

In Britain, pre WWII, the tastes of aristocrats, the only people who could afford to buy them and pay the experienced gardeners to breed them, ruled. When the bombing of Britain ruined the greenhouses, and made fuel too dear for heating greenhouses, their best catts were shipped to the US for safety.

Here, they began to be bred for the holiday gift and corsage trade. People in the public eye and movie stars were even given free orchid corsages to be photographed in to expand the market. Catts that bloomed at the right time, in the right size, and with enough individual flowers to be economically feasible started to be bred more and more and more. And got the awards, the AQs for good breeding, etc etc.

When the midwest greenhouses went down in a couple of cold winters, breeding moved to CA and FL. Then a couple of hurricanes in FL bankrupted the FL growers, and breeding moved to HI.

In HI, the Japanese breeders couldn't afford the $$$$ for the big old FCC catts to breed with, so started breeding with other things they had, and the compact and mini-catts were born. But again, there was a market for them.

You can't take economic realities out of the breeding question. Breeders are just people, and they need money both to live and to buy and breed and grow their stock for market.

As long as people supply an honest product, I don't grudge them their living, and I hope they don't grudge me mine.

jodik - what breed of dogs do you have and did you show them?

Brooke - ex-professional dog handler

Some you guys just don't get it, do you. Jokic is right about maintaining quality. I'm not saying that the these so-called big box store orchids are inferior. Some are. But that goes for any nursery, even a full-time operating orchid nursery. You get runts of the litter. Orchids are a business. And as a SUCCESSFUL business you have to invest in R&D. You guys just don't get it. There is no conspiracy to produce inferior orchids, but a lack of involvement in developing a SUPERIOR one. These MASS PRODUCERS of ORCHDS are fueling a CONSUMER SYSTEM of BUY CHEAP AND THROW IT AWAY. It's the Wal Mart way. The Big Box stores nor the monster mass orchid growers don't give a rats ass about if the plant survives after it is bought. In fact, if they model their business after American consumerism, the ideal scenario IS the plant lives for a few months and then you go back and buy another to replace it. Breeders are one thing, mass producers are another. But they go hand in hand. THIS IS A MORAL QUESTION LIKE IT OR NOT. IT IS NOT NAIVE, BUT BASIC TENET OF GOOD BUSINESS: BUILD A BETTER MOUSE TRAP. Apple didn't get where they are by building the same old thing. They constantly re-invent themselves. They turn out superior products based on the idea of making computers easy for people to use. Bill Gates created Windows because the software at the time was too confusing and difficult to use. Toyota creates Lexus and the hybrid Prius and leaves Detroit in the dust. I don't care where the products are made either. If it means they are made in China, okay. As long as quality control is kept high. But look at Mattel and the the lead paint recall. Somebody screwed up royally and who pays for this? Everyone. We are so brainwashed by CHEAPER CHEAPER CHEAPEST, that we've abandoned quality control. I'm not saying that the orchid that you buy in your supermarkets are generally substandard. And sure, you might get lucky and find a clone of a awarded plant. But some of you don't seem to comprehend what I'm trying to get across. Sure mass production will all save us money, give us more cheaper plants. But what about the future? What about looking to make a better hybrid. Bigger flowers. Better shaped flowers. More flowers per inflorescence etc. WHEN BEN BRACEY RAN ARMACOST AND ROYSTON HIS OBJECTIVE WAS TO CREATE THE BEST CATTLEYA HE COULD HYBRIDIZE. HE USED THE BEST PARENTS. AND CREATED THE BUILDING BLOCK OF MANY HYBRIDS WE SEE TODAY. He was also business savy. And he knew his market. But he sacrificed many things to create award quality flowers. Norman's Bay only makes two flowers per inflorenscence. And by coupling that with Bonanza (which only has 2 to 4 flowers too) he was striving for a finer shaped flower over simple cut flower productivity. He could have gone about like some places (Patterson was a great place and produced many fine hybrids, but they did concentrate on high cut flower production) and go the easy route and produce a simple highly productive cattleya. He did both. But always using his knowledge of fine parents. The BEST parents. HE DID HIS R&D.
Henry Ford created the model T. It was a breakthrough in modern production line automobile manufacturing. But the Model T eventually failed. They called it the Tin Lizzy. Because it would shake and rattle down the street. And it only came in black. This gave Chevrolet foot in the door and develop a better car. A competition to Ford. Chevy outsold Ford when this happened. In order to stay on top of business, you have to keep innovating. The same holds true for ornamental horticulture. I've said this again and again, in order to sustain your business for the future, you have to come up with something new. Something "better." Look at the amazing progress that has been made in poinsettias. Day lilies that rival and out-rival the most gaudy cattleya. More color variations in petunias. Hardier perennials that can tolerate colder climates. The list is endless. If you want to see the same damn orchid in our local big box store day after day, fine. But as a student of business (I am an advertising creative director, obsolescence is death). Business will only thrive on innovation. And QUALITY IS THE KEY. QUALITY IS JOB ONE! THE REALITY OF BUSINESS IS THAT INNOVATE OR DIE. And don't be so naive people. Everyone is trying to make a buck. And not an honest one. CUT CORNERS. CUT CORNERS. GROW UP. For crying out loud. The explosion of these mass orchid producers are fueling mediocrity. is that what you want? I don't want to pass judgement on them as far as their business model. Perhaps they are doing working to produce better hybrids. But I'm not seeing that. All I see are the same junk at Home Depot or even Ebay every day. Clones of clones of clones. And be careful ladies and gentlemen. Like they say about copy machines, the more you make a copy from another copy, the less quality you will get. And in the case of these over-cloned meristems, high rate of mutation. Some may never flower and just grow leaves. All twisted and funky. But you paid a few bucks for it. So what? Just throw it away. And it is a wasted life. Plants are living things too. And for that person who said "breeders are just breeders just trying to make a buck." You are partially wrong. These people will fail. Or just get buy. They cannot compete in a world where supermarkets are filled with potted orchids. With the exception of Carter & Holmes, there are few large orchid companies in the U.S. that continue to be viable businesses. But Carter & Holmes under the direction of Gene Crocker still embraces Ben Bracey's ideal of creating the best orchid period. To Gene I salute him. Without people like Ben Bracey, Ernest Hetherington, Leo Holguin, George Off, Ferguson Beall, R.E. Patterson, Neil McDade and others, we wouldn't have the fabulous orchids we have today. And they were ALL ABOUT QUALITY. Today we rely on amateur breeders to create something new and superior. That may well be the future of hybridizing in the U.S. But these people are far from amateurs. They are AOS judges. Long time growers. All extremely knowledgeable about their selected genera and experts in their field. Ernest Hetherington told me to try to memorize each breeder plant's Sander's history. Learn their ploidy. Understand each plant's genetic potential.
With more advanced technology, we can discover a plant's ploidy more easily. We can discover ways to create more disease resistant plants. And maybe someday, discover a way to actually rid a plant of virus. Flasking and re-plating and setting planlets into flats doesn't take rocket science. The genius is making a new and unique plant. Something that will catch your eye and you will be instantly in love with. That's the nature of good business.

toyo, relax, for most of us, this is a hobby. Most of us cannot, will not, ever buy a $2000 cattleya. Most of us want pretty blooms, the thrill of seeing a seedling grow up to bloom, the thrill of the plant grown to specimen size.

Very few people here will ever show in an AOS show. Very few people here will ever set a pod and send it off for flasking. Very few people here will ever raise orchids from a flask, or for that matter, a compot. Most people acquire their first orchids just because they want to grow pretty plants that bloom and make them smile.

Most people here will leave the creation of better, higher quality orchids to the pros. Eventually, those better quality orchids will make it into mass production and yes, from award quality plants.

The Model T didn't fail, the improved Model A took it's place :>)

Brooke

Toyo, there is no need to scream. The pictures I posted is from a small Chinese company. Their products are for Asian markets. The orchids at US big box stores are mostly from Puerto Rico , Mexico, Central and South Americas.

If you really know computer, you should know Bill Gates is a thief and lair. Windows operating system is based on plagiarism. It is trash compared to the classical high quality UNIX. However, UNIX is less commercially popular because our consumers are shallow. They go for the looks. They cannot tell the internal quality.

So I guess to address your moral issue, we have to start with our education system. Then here comes the big headache, the arguing about how to run schools, especially the failing ones.

I also strongly disagree with your comments about Chinese toys. We have an ABC show on DC channel 5 News. There is an American Chemistry Ph.D. She invented a lead-testing tool. So, the crews conducted testing on all the toys near them. The finding was very scientific. Surprisingly, perhaps, they couldn't find a Chinese toy with lead. All the toys with lead were Made in America. They called several governmental departments. They were told these Made-in-USA toys were okay to safety standard. For example, the paint on a Made-in-USA glass had very high concentration of lead. But the paint was below where the mouth should be.

But wait a second, is that so? Then, are you suppose to drink out of a Barbie or helicopter? Chinese factories are given the formula by their US bosses. The issue is politicized only because the US government is unhappy about the deficit with China. If you really look at the quality of toys, Chinese toys are not more lead-prone than US toys. You can try the testing yourself. NPR and Public TV had a big show on this.

All of you are missing the point. Completely. Whether Bill Gates is a thief and a plagiarist isn't the point (you spelled liar wrong). The model A was an eventual failure. It was a shoddy. Then Ford had to make the model A. I know that. I don't need condescending comments. The fact is that Chevrolet took advantage of a void that Ford could not fill at the time. That's what competition is all about. Snaxs, I don't know where you get your facts, whether it's the fault of american toy manufacturers formulating lead based paints overseas just justifies my point of American consumerism. It's all about making things cheaper and faster. Sure a kid shouldn't be putting these toys into their mouth. The issue about Aqua Dot toys with paint when ingested metabolizes into a date rate drug. Again, whether or not a kid is dumb enough to eat or lick these toys is moot. Why are these toys made so slip-shot? I have friends who work at Mattel and they have been really hurt by this lead paint thing. The problem with the manufacturing process whether it be American, or Chinese or Mexico is all defined by the cut-throat business practices by American companies. Wal Mart forces foreign manufactures to keep cost down to the point that contractors and suppliers are forced to make inferior products. NO, A KID SHOULDN'T BE SUCKING ON A BARBIE DOLL unless he has some sort of fetish. I don't need that condescending attitude. Your sarcasm is so cliche. My thesis doesn't seem to reach many people. They have become brainwashed by American consumerism. We are a THROW AWAY SOCIETY. I'm not blaming China or India or anyone else but ourselves, We are a wasteful society. We are programmed to accept mediocrity, through our culture, our media, our educational system. The list goes on. And for "highjack" it's not about paying $2000 for an orchid or winning AOS awards or ribbons. If that is all you got out of my diatribe, you have missed the point as well. It's about expecting more from whatever we buy. That includes orchids. I'm all about paying less for something. But I'm all about quality. If you can get an FCC quality flower for about $20 would you pay for it? Sure you would. Well I hope so. Then this person says that most people wouldn't go through the trouble with flasking and making their own hybrids. That is not the point either. As I wrote, we have talented people who do hybridize and create new and beautiful things. I don't expect the novice to create his or her own new hybrid. Read carefully what I write. The point is quality, quality, quality. If you accept less in your life you will get it. If you accept mediocrity, you will live one. If you don't care, so be it. I'm not making any judgement statement against any of you. But I do care about the state of what is happening in America. You can cite any facts you want to justify whatever you want to pick apart my thesis. But you are in fact justifying my opinion that all that matters is the bottom line. There is indeed a moral issue of making this world a better place. Both in practical terms and esthetically. As humans, we don't go out to create to go backwards. We don't create an esthetic that is purposefully "ugly" whatever that means. Look, you get what you pay for. If you buy something that costs $3 you will get equal quality. But this does not have to be so. There is a responsibility for everyone to demand the best at the best price. Or if it cost a little more, okay. I wouldn't drive a BMW 700 series for $100. That's ridiculous. Art has played an important part of making this world a better place. From great architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies Van Der Rohe to artist Edward Hopper and Georgia O'Keefe, new American esthetics were created. Edward R Murrow reminded us all the great potential of television and the potential of abuse and mediocrity. We all have to be watchdogs. It's not about snobbery. It's about investing our lives with a sense integrity, beauty, honesty (everything that we make or do should be honest and true). We are all here to elevate each other. We can do that through flowers. How we get there, I've made my point. How we get it, well, that's what this topic was about in the first place. I'm just pointing out simply and concisely that productivity is nothing without creativity. Businesses will not succeed simply on continued cheap and fast production. I work in the creative field. We live and die by being creative. While superficial advertising is, you will remember certain great TV commercials. They were created by smart people with a drive to make something memorable. If not for just :30. How we fit into the scheme of consumerism is part in parcel of dealing with the devil. But there is a concerted effort by many advertising people to create something esthetically, and culturally special. Ernest Hetherington referred to creating an orchid an art form. And he's right. Orchids are a thing of beauty. Orchid growers have a responsibility to give the public, especially novice and first time grower, the best they have to offer. More is often never better. This is tried and true.
McDonald's pioneered the fast food industry. But as tastes changed, more competition from Wendy's and Burger King came, the Golden Arches started to crack and fall. For the most part, people are just happy with their regular cheese burger, but McDonald's saw the light. They changed their cooking methods from letting the burgers and fries sit under warming lights to making food as you order. While things are not perfect, they understood that in order to keep selling a billion burgers, it's not about making more restaurants or making more burgers, but making a better burger. Fries have a time limit on them. If after a few minutes there are still fries left in the bin, they are disposed and fresh fries are cooked up. Seems wasteful, but the public got tired of soggy fries. Good for them. People got tired of soggy buns. Good for them. People will quickly tire of the same old orchid flower at their big box store. Good for them. It's human nature to want something "better" and I know that is subjective. Nothing can beat a species in flower in situ. Some well-known awarded species are jungle collected. So I'm not saying that hybridizing is the end all to beat all. But nature constantly creates. Everything evolves. And business has to as well. This is not Camelot as someone glibly pointed out. It's all about how to really succeed in business. Enough said.

Happy New Year! :-)

Brooke - We breed and raise American Bulldogs and Olde Bulldogges... we don't show them, though. Neither breed is recognized by the AKC, which suits us fine... our dogs are registered with the NABA, NKC and OEBA... both are working breeds. At present, our kennel is closed to the public... we produce a litter every few years, to satisfy our own needs and those of a select few... if you ever get a chance to look at a book called "Gladiator Dogs" by Dr. Carl Semencic, you'll find several of our dogs pictured and written about, plus photos of my kids! :-)

I admit to being a novice orchid grower, and my goal is to have pretty flowers, just like many others... however... I think if we look at the "big picture", we can see that once a product is introduced and becomes popular with the public, it seems to go into immediate mass-production to get as much money out of it as possible! And not all items produced will be of high quality... many will be cheap imitations...

I see it all the time with dog breeds... a movie comes out with a dog in it... the public immediately wants that dog, and 90% of the public will do no research to determine whether it's the right breed for their circumstances... they find they can't handle the dog, and off it goes to a rescue organization or it gets dumped... in the meantime, so-called breeders are pumping out an alarming number of these animals with no thought to its future, just to rake in cash... we have the technology to look into the future of a proposed breeding to see how the litter will turn out, but not many breeders utilize the tools available... it's a shame... I feel that changing the natural selection of a species is playing God, and it's our duty and responsibility to do it right! This means culling when necessary, and breeding to maintain or better the breed in question...

I suppose some of that could be translated to the world of plants... we certainly have the technology to produce the very best...

I don't know... to me, genetic quality is more important than quantity produced, and I'd rather die a respected breeder than one with a bankload of cash and a trail of inferior animals and unhappy customers...

This is an interesting and controversial topic, it seems! I'll tread lightly -
I can see the points that are being made by toyo and jodik, but I'm curious as to how this impacts us. It's one thing when it's animals we're talking about, because the humane treatment of these creatures gets jeopardized when quality is sacrificed for quantity. I can see why we want to prevent that. But orchids? Now - I'm don't want to get any plant-right groups down my neck, but I mean "what's the big deal" is essentially my question?

If this was a food crop, then sacrificing quality over quantity matters - we're putting these things in our bodies. If this was a car or something, then yes, it matters because our safety is on the line. But this is an ornamental plant! Maybe I'm not getting the point either, but to me, businesses exist for one purpose only, and that is to benefit the CEOs. If the public demands cheap ornamental flowers that they can throw away after they die, and the market exists for that, then so be it.

Attempting to convince people who know nothing about growing orchids to buy a 'better quality hybrid' for 2 times the money is pointless - while it's important to have furniture that is high quality and will last, or kitchen cookware that doesn't disintegrate into teflon flakes after washing, or electronics that don't burst into flames after the 100th use, not everyone is an orchid grower who will water, fertilize and take time to rebloom a plant - and as a result, *YES* - cheap quantity matters more than quality. (And you don't need to convince people who *do* grow orchids because we'd likely never buy from these big stores anyway!)

Toyo - I see you're point about quality being the key to successful business, but realistically, that is not the case in this market. Yes we want progressively better quality computers...and cars...but the plain old white phal will always be profitable, and so in the current situation, maximizing profit isn't a matter of quality, but rather - cheap quantity. In *this* market, quality barely matters at all, because no non-orchid grower is going to care whether their plant is 8N, well bred and a hybrid...they will not care if their plant is a noid...they will only care that they get flowers for 4 months. They will not care about the quality of this plant as they will (or should) about their automobiles, pets, electronics, furniture etc...

Why should these companies invest in producing better hybrids? What is a better hybrid anyway? "Better" is subjective, depending on your objectives, isn't it? "Better" for us could mean better breeding stock for better growing hybrids, better genetic quality for more robust progeny .... "Better" for them could mean better shelf life, longer flowering, larger flowers. Why should they invest in something that won't matter to the consumer? Investing in better computers, better appliances, better furniture DOES matter to the consumer - better genes does not. I said it before - there are 2 markets for the orchid - the small population of hobby grower/breeder which does want quality because they expect to rebloom their plants, and the larger population of non-growers who just want pretty flowers in their house. Will investing in higher quality hybrids convert more people to orchid growing? No, of course not!

The bottom line is -
They'll still get thrown away, except instead of lots of regular people throwing away cheap genetically inferior (and they're not even THAT bad, genetically speaking) you'll have a few wealthy people throwing away expensive genetically superior plants. Either way this doesn't effect the hobby grower population. Meanwhile, the regular people will just go back to growing Christmas cactuses, african violets and poinsettias.

And unlike the dog story, no one really complains about plants being mistreated anyway, so that's a mute point.

Now if this is a discussion about the ethics of business - that's an entirely different can of worms! Sadly, I don't know enough about business to talk about that, except I don't like the way they ruthlessly fire people and advocate consumerism - but at the same time, I believe that the competition gained through capitalism is necessary for innovation and progress to occur, so I guess we agree about that. It's just that when it comes to the orchid market, there is really no demand (nor any necessity of a demand) for higher quality from the main niche they are trying to target.

Well, to some people quality is everything. That is because they perhaps dream of winning Champion Orchid at a major show.

You hear of people mericloning a mericlone of a mericlone which is fraught with danger because the further you get away from the mother plant the chances of a mutation increase.

But this comment cannot apply to orchids bought at mass outlets because most of the orchids sold there are in bloom. It might apply if you buy an unflowered mericlone from an unreliable source. BUT, in plants, not all mutations are bad. Witness some beautiful variations that have occurred in mericloning Onc. Sharry Baby 'Sweet Fragrance'.

Though i agree with the remarks above re. people handing in dogs to pounds, rescue societies. (how do those people live with themselves). i do not think the discussion of genetics re. plants v animals has much to offer the topic.

All the plants i've seen at mass outlets are fine. What is the problem if they are treated as a cheap bunch of flowers?

Then we have the usual problem of when giving thanks, you always forget someone. H & R in Hawaii, David Littman in Australia plus many many others.

Well jodik, I've spent most of my adult life involved in dogs and those are two breeds I've never heard of. Glad you are having success and keeping the breed safe from the self-promoters.

Are either of your breeds eligible for the Miscellaneous Class at AKC shows or is the intent to never have them recognized.

Brooke

To easily dismiss orchids as throw away plants is cavalier. In a consumer based society, big business decides for us what is fashionable. What is "good". What is chic, was is now. We are fed a certain predetermined aesthetic. Yes, orchids are not essential for living. They are not food stuffs. They don't pose safety problems. It's ridiculous to link the two. Orchids and all ornamental flowering plants are simply decorative objects. But lets put that in context. We're not talking about the sturdiness of furniture. The reliability of a car or computer. I am talking about the esthetics and quality of such. The great metal smith Robert Jarvie and Louis Comfort Tiffany created objects, decorative objects that really had no practical need. Sure, Tiffany made lamps and Jarvie made candlesticks, but neither item was deemed necessary for living. A man could go out a buy a cheap candlestick for dollar at the turn-of-the century. And while Jarvie and Tiffany were expensive for their day, both men had the ethos to create works of art. The created a new aesthetic which in turn revolutionized the decorative arts movement. When seeing how successful these two men were, many copied their design. When Gustav Stickley designed his line of furniture, it was to create a new aesthetic. Something new, simple and a reaction to the shoddy, gaudy cheap Victorian furniture of the day. His mantra was quality over quantity. With his success, an entire esthetic was born. Manufacturers everywhere copied his style of furniture. Again, any Joe Blow could have bought a simple uninteresting chair from Marshall Field, but now he had a choice. He had an esthetic choice. It wasn't simply a matter of one chair being better built that the next (though Gustav Stickley made the finest, well made furniture of its day) it was Stickley's new vision of decorative arts. Art and design play an important roll in manufacturing. Your new car may have the same old chassis, but it sports a new skin. How practical is that? Frank Lloyd Wright set out to make architecture more than a simple box. Or in his day, a Victorian hodgepodge. He created a style in design that was imitated throughout the world. But were his cantilevers necessary. No. were his Mayan inspired glyphs on some houses load bearing. No. Frank Lloyd Wright elevated architecture to an art form. As humans, we surround ourselves with art everyday. Some good. Mostly crap. Big business gain spoon feeds us the new aesthetic. They tell us through advertising and other media what's "beautiful" and what's not. The same can be said about ornamental plants. Remember, ornamental plants. Not corn, squash, tomatoes. That's another can of worms. But in OH, if a big AG company decided that the new geraniums were going to be double petaled and bright blue, who knows what the reaction would be. Their maybe a run on the market. But the OH business is constantly working toward creating a better plant. As trite and shallow as some of you think, men and woman with masters degrees and PhDs are studying ways to make your houseplant a better one. Not only for practical purposes like better growth, disease resistance and general hardiness, but a much more attractive and eye-catching bloom. Wider petals. Thicker substance. More intense colors. Pure esthetics. And good business sense. The aim IS quality. With that will come demand and then intense production. Poinsettias are a perfect example of the throw away plant. People buy them in droves for he holiday and by January 2nd they are in the dust bin. But all along, these growers and hybridizers have been secretly creating different color combinations. Pure white poinsettias. Double petal (bracts) poinsettias. Multi-color poinsettias. The are raising the standard and quality of the average red poinsettia. Okay, so many people just want the red and green form. But look at the strides these people have made since the plant was discovered in Mexico nearly a hundred years ago. From a tall leggy bush to what we see in the market. Full form. Pure red brackts. A beautiful plant. And for the new All white poinsettias, a new market for them as cut flowers for Winter weddings. A new untapped market. And a new revenue stream. This is good business. As movers and shakers in the business world CEOs have the power to influence people's lives. They can spoon feed them crap, or educate the consumer with I would call a touch of class. Target has hired many well-known industrial and fashion designers to come in and re-design everything. Now it's hip to shop a Target (say it in a french accent). The mass consumer can be shown the beauty of a well-bred orchid. They will see how the petals overlap. How the form is full and inviting. How prolific the blooms are. How thick the substance of the petals are. How deep the coloor or interesting the pattern.
Without saying a word, or advertising a change, quality can be instantly and secretly infused into the consumer world. And its so easy. Raising the esthetic bar is not hard. Consumers will automatically be drawn to the superior plant. I seem them at Home Depot carefully making their choices. Not on just price alone, but the best plant they can get for the money.
We are assuming consumers are stupid. Far from it. Consumers demand quality. If given a choice between a phalie with double spikes and full flowers over a half dead one, the consumer will take the "good" plant. There are many orchid rescuers who will by the cheap little plant and try to grow it up. That's not who I'm talking about. Mass production is just a means to an end. It is not the basis of business, but simply another cog. It really doesn't matter if it's a toaster, a computer or an orchid, the fact of the matter is simple. Build a better product and the consumer will flock to your door. Sometimes you can't beat a classic. In the case of the hybrid tea rose, Mr Lincoln and Chrysler Imperial, few red roses have come close to eclipsing them. That just show you the enduring nature of quality vs. quantity. A good business doesn't benefit the CEO, it benefits the stockholders. And yes, stockholders couldn't care less about quality. Their bottom line is money. But the smart CEO has the responsibility to grow his business. And through innovation more than anything, the company will flourish. Complacency is what kills business. Innovation invigorates it. Pixar is one of the most talented group of animator I've had the pleasure of working with. With the guidance of John Lassetter, PIxar has created memorable and Academy Award winning animation. (going back to a previous blog, is entertainment truly neccessary?)
No. But Pixar's mantra again is quality quaiity quality and nothing less. They have created the new esthetic in 3-D animation. AND they are successful at it. The will never turn out mediocrity. But by doing what they have, they have creatied a new industry standard that everyone from Dreamcast to Disney now follows. The point is, you can create schlock. And for a few pennies more you can creat something great. What holds us back is the jaded few that believe that we as consumers have no say in what we want. We accept mediocrity because it is fed to us. If you let it be, so you shall it become. Orchids and OH flowers are not a necessity in life. But neither were the other examples I mentioned. And I can go on. They a a part of decorative art. As simple as a vase. Or a candlestick. Whether it holds a candle or not. But as a piece of decorative art, the plant holds the potential to be a real piece of art. Yes, they can be beautiful in a simplistic way. But as a commodity, it holds the potential to elevate the orchid esthetic experience. Sip a glass of wine. Sip an inexpensive wine. It may require a spit take. Or it maybe pleasurable. If it is indeed good, you know why. Quality. The winery and winemaster took great care in balancing flavors, mixing varietals. They made the best wine they could and the bonus was, it was at a reasonable cost. Their name becomes well known. Their label and vintage wins awards. Soon they are asked to join the ranks of the most expensive of wines. Cases constatly sold out. And is wine a necessity for life? NO. A good wine is pleasure and enjoyment. And it was by no mistake. IT was all about quality and honesty. And in the end good business sense. Make a cheap bottle of wine, that is undrinkable, good bye business. I don't know how many analogies I have to make for people to understand that as trivial as one orchid flower is, it represents another important element in the struggle to elevate consumer awareness to virtues of quality. "Better" is not a subjective goal. It IS the goal and business model for all companies. The bottom line is that the plant is going to be thrown away. Aruthurn says that so cavalier and insensitive. Maybe so. But does it have to be? I've made my point a thousand times about this faulty system of American Consumerism. Waste Waste Waste. People like Arurhurn jadedly folds and says that's just the way it its. It's people like him that continue this cycle of post consumer waste. And the acceptance, without question, that mediocrity is part of living in the United States. He's also missing the point. What the consume does with his or her plant when they take it home is their problem. If they kill it out of neglect or overwatering, it's not the plants fault. You cannot engineer indestructible robotic tolerances for a living creature. That's plain ridiculous. The question is why waste a good plant on someone who is just going to kill it. These people don't want to kill it. Just look at this FORUM. READ THE HELP ME blogs. Tell me that they want to do do something to save their precious gift. Cheap mass production of orchid plants have contributed to the this malaise of apathy. But again, it doesn't take that much more effort to create, distribute a "better" orchid (for all the reasons I described) than it is for a cheap clone of a clone or an inferior seedling. The technology is obviously there to make them. And again, mass production is simply at tool. It is not the heart of business. I mentioned earlier of the overcloning of may orchid plants. An while some have resulted in a sport, a so-called "good mutation" the vast majority of over-cloned plants are useless. Some so deformed that they become un-recognizable. And I am talking about unrealiable sources. Many from foreign countries. The fast is, quality has been undermined. At Stewarts, mersistems were taken only from the original virus free mother plant and the cloning process took place in small batches to avoid proliferation and mutation. Carter and Holmes practices the same process.You are most assured a clone that wlll be true to form. And what is the problem of treating the mutant flowrers as cheap bunch flowers. Everything. It goes back to accepting failure and mediocrity and disavowing responsibility to those who perpetrated this travesty. If I bought a clone i expect it to bloom true to form. And if it doesn't I want my money back. Business is business. If you produce high quality stock you will get repeat customers. Plain and simple. Now plant genetics and animal genetics maybe a stretch. But the gist of the matter is quality should be king. Why should we settle for less? Again, the glib guy who said he's not paying 2 grand for an orchid is asleep at the wheel. The point that the dog breeder is making is that, like certain growers, or manufacturers, care isn't given to provide the best possible end product. Puppy mills are like plant mills to some extent. Take the plant/mammalian aspect out of it. As a commodity, There are animal breeders who willy nilly breed inferior pets, who end up deformed, sick and with all sorts of congenital disease. And the bottom line is money. And if the dog is destroyed who cares? Well there is obviously less an emotional attachment when someone heaves a dead orchid into the compost heap. But my initial intent was to prove that through careful, selective breeding, like we did in the old days, and with the help of new technology we can elevate the standard of orchid blooms and plants and at minimal cost to the consumer. Again, for the 5th time, would you rather have an FCC quality flower as opposed to a runty little weedy flower for the same price. NO. At least I hope not. We have to change our mindset. We have to stop letting big business dictate mediocre esthetics. It sounds trivial but in the entire scheme of things, it is pandemic. For the last time, I will repeat what the great Edward R Murrow said (I'm paraphrasing) about the new media televsioin, "Television has the potential for great good. To teach. To enlighten. But it also as the potential for abuse. For mediocrity. We all have to vigilant." To accept the status quo, to accept mediocrity is to lower ourselves to lowest common denominator. Human kind will stagnate. All because of a flower? Hardly. But it's just a start. A tiny one at that. There is a difference between compromise and just letting go and let society step all over us. We are indeed a nation of automatons brainwashed by Wal Mart. We feed the furnace of lousy comsumer products just so we can get them at below cost. And if the they break. So what. We just buy another. And our landfills continue to overflow. The world's resources stretched so thin just so we can have a new DVD player. And if falls apart after a year or so we buy a new one. The same goes for orchids. It takes a certain amount of resources, water, food, agar, nutrients, light and labor to produce a plantlet. It too is a consumer commodity that uses precious resources. All things come from other things. The real story is how do we make it the best product we can?

Toyo - thanks for your post. It was enlightening in it's passion. I agree with you, except for the statement that better is not a subjective goal. In the orchid market, it IS a subjective goal, SIMPLY because there are 2 niches that exist - the large population of public consumers, and the smaller population of hobby growers, amateur and novice.

*You* speak of a better breed of orchid for the general consumer, and when I say general consumer, I mean the people who are NOT on these forums, but rather, the vast majority of people who buy the plant as a toss-away flower. What does this better breed constitute, exactly? I mentioned invisible traits like genetics, chromosome count, which clearly don't matter at all - these differences between mediocrity and superiority in the orchid can never be appreciated by the average consumer.

There are so many traits for the hobby grower that we would consider that a consumer would never consider - I'll say it again - chromosome count??! why would a consumer care about that?

Now if we're talking 'Better' being about drastic differences in the color of orchids, ie blue phals, or even an increase in variety and color, then yes. I agree 100% that these businesses should (and most likely ARE) investing in technology, because these are traits that can be appreciated by the public. I have seen an increase in the variety of cattleyas being offered, dendrobiums and cymbidiums, which is surely a refreshing change from the mass of phals that floods the market. I have seen lots of interesting colors mass produced, previously which were only available to hobby growers from specialist vendors. I've seen heat tolerant cymbs which are now on the mass market. These are improvements *I* see, and improvements the public will also see and respond to. Yes, these are improvements that should be made by these companies, and are most definitely being made.

So you see - this entire innovation for a better quality plant can span different levels - better color and form will be something that's appreciated by everyone, hobby grower and public. It is worth investing in, and I can assure you that companies *are* investing in this. Chromosome count? Who cares if it's 3N, except for the grower interested in using the plant as a parent. Crappy genetics? Whatever! So should the company invest in ensuring all their plants are the correct polyploidy? Absolutely not.

"People like Arurhurn jadedly folds and says that's just the way it its. It's people like him that continue this cycle of post consumer waste. And the acceptance, without"
Toyo, how about some paragraphs and at least spell my nickname correctly.
What is wrong with someone buying their mom or their girl friend a lovely orchid in a pot? The plain fact of the matter is that most orchid nursery owners would starve if they depended on the hobby grower for a living.

American consumerism? Cannot comment because i live in another country.

As for the better orchid? I think Calvin has already covered that. Though, better as in round or filled in as required by certain orchid judging criteria may not be better in the long term.

Better as in easier to grow with the flower lasting longer. That certainly applies to some of the newer "Cattleya Hybrids" in my collection.

Brooke - The Olde Bulldogge is a rather obscure breed, so I'm not too surprised you haven't run across it, but the American Bulldog? You've never seen the movie "Homeward Bound"? Or "Little Rascals"? Both movies used American Bulldogs.

I believe the AKC tried to purchase American Bulldog stud books in the past, but were turned down. These breeds are recognized by several registries already, and there are national shows and magazines devoted to them. Inevitably, they have already begun spiraling down the tube to genetic doom in many of the hands they are in. It's a horrible shame that there isn't some type of breeder regulation, and I mean intelligent breeder regulation... not the "if it looks like a duck, it must be a duck" government mentality that gets Bull breed and Mastiff type dogs banned in many places...

What breeds do you handle, Brooke? I'm just curious...

Maybe the "puppy mill" analogy is not a good one, but I'd still rather search out and pay for quality products than become one of the sheep that blindly follows the spoon-fed, mass-produced, cheap trend of the day...

Nope I've never seen Homeward Bound but in the Little Rascals series, I believe it was an American Staffordshire terrier used - do you mean the white dog with the black patch over his one eye?

AKC doesn't buy the stud books from a miscellaneous breed. To ever gain recognition, the Parent Club of the breed must maintain a stud book for X number of years to gain recognition if they wish to be included in AKC sponsored events. Some don't but the AKC has to have a long history of the "pure" in the breed.

The correct word is "did" handle. I quit in '82 to have a life. As you know, having a kennel and the responsibility of the dogs in your care is a 24hr/7day a week job. My help always got off on vacation/holidays, I didn't :>)

My specialty was drop coat breeds. If it grew hair and I could trim it, I showed it. I did show smooth coated breeds but they weren't my favorites. I did make a foray back to dog shows ten years ago but it was as an owner/handler with the "pet" I bought with the promise if he turned out I would finish him. Not only did I finish him and several of his immediate relatives but many of his champion get. And he is still my pet :>)

I HATE puppy mills!

Brooke

It is the never ending discussion on demand and supply. Whether it is Christmas Poinsettias, Thanksgiving mums, or ever-lasting phalaenopsis for a front office...I bet you most people in this country have gone through the drill of buying Chrysanthemums and then trashing them instead of planting...Same with orchids, unfortunately - there is a mass market for them, and there will be a supply.
But, as with the pet industry, there will be puppy mills and the responsible breeders (however, I am not fond of either, after doing years of rescue). Those getting upset about the wasteful society when talking about orchids are preaching to the wrong crowd - we are here to grow, not to decorate and discard...

Olya
p.s. gotta admit, competition does come with minuses as well as with pluses...