Catalogue in PDF

[Wightknight]

Sal,



Several posts have made mention of the 2002 Catalogue.



Do you have plans to produce an electronic version that could be downloaded as a pdf file? It would provide your customers with a much quicker reference tool to your products as well as saving you the cost of sending catalogues to customers overseas.



(If you are not, could I have a copy of the paper catalogue please?)



Regards,



Paul

[scolby]

Agreed, the PDF format is the standard world-side for most presentations in the Business to Business world. Also quite common in Business to Consumer as well.

Spyderco should really consider this simple, cheap and awesome format.

"Chance favors the prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur

[Rookie]

Please Sal<img src="smile.gif" width=15 height=15 align=middle>

In the land of knives, Spyderco is king.

Edited by - Rookie on 1/29/2002 12:58:35 PM

[kraziekurtis]

Not to say it is a bad idea but I remember Sal saying that they didn't update the site fast because they wanted to sell the older models first instead of having an &quot;abundancy&quot; of those because people are anticipating the new ones.

The PDF PDR would produce a predicament because it would allow for them to anticipate the new and improved knives, therefore not buying the older versions.

<img src="smile.gif" width=15 height=15 align=middle>

But then again, I have flipped through the paper one so much the front cover has fallen off <img src="tongue.gif" width=15 height=15 align=middle>

Edited by - kraziekurtis on 1/29/2002 2:06:47 PM

[kraziekurtis]

Double post...sorry

Edited by - kraziekurtis on 1/29/2002 2:05:40 PM

[Joyce Laituri]

That's the plan eventually. We're gearing up for updating the site and have tossed the idea around about what we should include. The PDR in PDF format was on the list.
Any other suggestions?????
Joyce

[Joyce Laituri]

oops-trigger happy.

Edited by - Joyce Laituri on 1/31/2002 9:13:20 AM

[scolby]

Joyce, a couple of comments, meant to be constructive.

1) On fixed blade knives, it is critical that the sheaths be as well advertised as the blades. This has not been done well or consistently to date.

2) For some reason, Spyderco's photographs of their own product on their website are generally inferior to the photographs that the major internet dealers use. The photos in the PDR are generally of good quality however. I can't quite figure out why the images used for your online catalogue and store are small, fuzzy and non-scaleable.

By the way, I think the product matrix added to the 2002 PDR is of great value and a great idea. Also, your new graphic identity is greatly appreciated by me.



"Chance favors the prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur

[Tightwad]

Joyce, Please.......make it easy to navigate. The simpler
the better. Also include pics that are large enough to showcase
the knife being viewed. And, please. (!) don't make it fancy. Just the
pics and the facts. None of us like sites that waste our download time

[Jeff/1911]

The main thing I'd like to see is that the images of the knives be &quot;clickable&quot; to enlarge into full sized, high resolution images.

Jeff.

[panguero]

Hi Joyce,

Edited by - sharp1 on 2/19/2002 5:29:16 PM

[Tom Percy]

Personaly, while I like the electronic versions, I still prefer to have the hard copy. The Dealers version is the better of the 2, and it helped sell quite a few Spydies to friends that were impressed with not only the calalogue, but the 'samples' that I always have on hand.

Anyway, I would like to get a 2002 version of the Dealers catalogue if possible.

[nomaded]

I think a PDF version of the PDR should be the exact same thing as the PDR (should be pretty easy to generate, depending on how the PDR was created).

As for the website, I agree, with what many others have said already, there should be links to pics of the knives that are larger resolution - maybe something in the 640x480 range. The current navigation isn't bad, but it isn't great either. Some improvements there would be appreciated.

And lastly, the Dealer's Catalog is very nice (thanks John!) at 8.5&quot;x11&quot;, instead of being a third of that size.

[J Smith]

I second what Jeff/1911 said.

Jeff