Mari vs. LaBella

Choice of classical guitar strings and technical issues connected with their use.
Leo
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:45 am
Location: Bay Area, California

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Leo » Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:52 am

Keith wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:19 am
I suspect La Bella may not want a distributor to sell Mari strings because Daniel Mari is part of the family that started/owns La Bella and then split. I suspect the split may not have been all that friendly.
Very much hinted at during my conversation.

Leo
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:45 am
Location: Bay Area, California

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Leo » Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:57 am

petermc61 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:50 am
Keith wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:19 am
I suspect La Bella may not want a distributor to sell Mari strings because Daniel Mari is part of the family that started/owns La Bella and then split. I suspect the split may not have been all that friendly.
I understand the sentiment but what I don't understand is how that translates into what brands SBM does or doesn't sell.
I think with La Bella it was us or them, but not both.

User avatar
petermc61
Posts: 5943
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:11 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by petermc61 » Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:38 am

Leo wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:57 am
petermc61 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:50 am
Keith wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:19 am
I suspect La Bella may not want a distributor to sell Mari strings because Daniel Mari is part of the family that started/owns La Bella and then split. I suspect the split may not have been all that friendly.
I understand the sentiment but what I don't understand is how that translates into what brands SBM does or doesn't sell.
I think with La Bella it was us or them, but not both.
I understand that. What I don't understand is one of the world's leading economies why that is acceptable. In Australia, an attempt to do that would be seen as anti-competitive (contrary to the overarching interests of consumers) and would be open to prosecution.

User avatar
Paul Janssen
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 2:05 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Paul Janssen » Tue Sep 19, 2017 12:29 pm

I've just ordered a couple sets of Mari 100p strings from Ostrie and 1 x Cantiga 510R_Bass (hope these were the right ones?) and 1 x bass Pyramid Sterling Silver from SBM.

The Pyramid basses are for my Cedar Richard Howell and the Cantiga basses are for my son's Cedar/EIR Katoh (he has his grade 4 exam coming up at the start of November and I wanted a step up from the EJ46's that we've been using on his guitar). I had to pay 2 lots of shipping so I understand what others are saying about wishing that SBM could stock the Mari's. Still the things we do for our art!!

Leo
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:45 am
Location: Bay Area, California

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Leo » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:41 pm

petermc61 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:38 am
I understand that. What I don't understand is one of the world's leading economies why that is acceptable. In Australia, an attempt to do that would be seen as anti-competitive (contrary to the overarching interests of consumers) and would be open to prosecution.
Talked with my daughter who is a lawyer, and she referred me to site at the US Department of Justice that talks about competition and monopoly under the Sherman Act. The Act seems to allow exclusive dealings between two parties at the expense of another under certain circumstances.

Jeffrey Armbruster
Posts: 1527
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 3:16 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Jeffrey Armbruster » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:56 pm

In a world where Ama...the Big Muddy is allowed to do all that they do...grocery stores, anyone?...a spat between Mari and La Bella isn't at the top of my personal agenda of monopoly gripes. Somehow, the world economy will survive this.
Paul Weaver spruce 2014
Takamine C132S

Guitarhancock
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 5:32 am

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Guitarhancock » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:53 am

Here is the way it works in reality. Neither LaBella or Mari are required to sell their product to anyone. They can sell their product from the back door of their warehouse if they have the correct local licenses. Or they can sell to WalMart and not to Amazon if they choose. If SBM wants to only sell LaBella they can . If they want to sell Mari and La Bella does not like it then SBM can tell LaBella to take a hike unless they have a binding legal contract they signed not to sell Mari strings. This happens throughout retailing in the USA. Many high end companies that only sell to Saks, Macys and Nordstrom would never sell to Costco or Wal Mart because their items would be sold at a lower price. It works.
Do not let the government interfere. Any more than it does.
Australia sounds like a great place to live but ....SBM is in the USA. Competition

By the way this is my OP. What comments.Thank you all. I will try Mari strings

User avatar
petermc61
Posts: 5943
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:11 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by petermc61 » Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:39 am

Guitarhancock wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:53 am
Here is the way it works in reality. Neither LaBella or Mari are required to sell their product to anyone. They can sell their product from the back door of their warehouse if they have the correct local licenses. Or they can sell to WalMart and not to Amazon if they choose. If SBM wants to only sell LaBella they can . If they want to sell Mari and La Bella does not like it then SBM can tell LaBella to take a hike unless they have a binding legal contract they signed not to sell Mari strings. This happens throughout retailing in the USA. Many high end companies that only sell to Saks, Macys and Nordstrom would never sell to Costco or Wal Mart because their items would be sold at a lower price. It works.
Do not let the government interfere. Any more than it does.
Australia sounds like a great place to live but ....SBM is in the USA. Competition
I understand all of that and agree that, by and large, that is competition at play. It may well be that as we have a smaller domestic market we therefore need additional regulation. This regulation is not interfering with competition, but designed to stop anti-competitive behaviour. The only example given by you above where it would trigger in Australia is a case where a supplier offered product to a retailer but did so on the basis that the retailer could not stock a competitor's products. The reason for this is to avoid large players using their market power to stifle smaller competitors, which is certainly not in the interests of consumer in the longer term.

Regards
Peter

User avatar
Lorette
Posts: 481
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 5:17 am
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Mari vs. LaBella

Post by Lorette » Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:24 pm

Guitarhancock wrote:
Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:32 am
I play LaBella light tension. For those who have played the Mari do you have comments about the differences. Is it worth a test of the Mari strings?
Yes. This topic influenced me to order a set of Mari strings. I have been using them for two weeks now on three guitars and am very pleased. After a few tunings they held fast and feel smooth and silky on the fingers. These are the light set - 100p and 100pL. As to their longevity, hilm3g says “they seem to last forever”. I’ll let you know my experience in the future. I’m comparing these to La Bell 900 golden superior which I love and have been using for the past nine years. So far, I prefer the Mari’s and plan to order a set for my flamenco guitar.

Thanks guys for all your imput.
Lorette

Return to “Classical Guitar Strings”