Cost of rods

linkledger

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
1,308
Location
Hornchurch outer London
Have been looking to by a new Barbel rod for next season.

Looking at hand built rods with the best spec, 3 leg rings, full cork handle etc, price coming in at about £250.

How is it that trout rods can be double or treble that price?

Know they can be a lot less but so can coarse rods.

Why the excessive price tag compared to top quality coarse rods.

And yes I do know how much poles cost as I have two, it's the rods I'm talking about.
 
G

guest37226

Guest
Personally I think its market forces if people buying fly rods pay high prices then the new price will remain high.
For coarse tackle rods etc as a barbel fisherman also, the mainstream coarse angler would not pay inflated prices. So prices are more realistic.

I suppose its like selling ford fiesta or a BMW you crank up the price due to the market you are selling to, or ability to buy.

In my view never buy fly tackle new always buy second-hand better deals

AJ
 

peanut_head75

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
1,404
Location
Newport, Shrops
On a slight tangent but still related to cost; why is it out of the two rods the family bought me for my 40th that I 'like' the £500 Hardy but 'love' the £49 Wychwood?
We're a funny bred ain't we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Tommy Ruffe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,996
Location
Ecclesfield Parish
Didn't you know that the more you pay for a fly rod the better it is. I like my Orvis Clearwater but it isn't nearly as good as the expensive £500+ rods ... apparently. I think rod prices reflect the angler's ability to pay - some rich people go fly fishing.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

luke troutstalker

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
11,359
Location
Cheshire.
I like my Shakespeare Agility Rise but it isn't nearly as good as the expensive £500+ rods ... apparently

:rolleyes:
It's not apparently, it's a fact. Better in every respect, build quality, materials, performance, warranty.

That's not to say your agility is bad, it isn't. It's just not as good as £500's worth of made in the USA rod.
 

richfish1

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
9,111
Location
Shropshire & Mid Wales
It's not apparently, it's a fact. Better in every respect, build quality, materials, performance, warranty.

That's not to say your agility is bad, it isn't. It's just not as good as £500's worth of made in the USA rod.
I expect Shakespeare would win on customer service hands down though..
(I'm talking about £500 Hardy rods though)
 
Last edited:

lepirate

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
3,509
Location
devon
Many people make a very basic mistake. They assume fishing tackle manufacturers/suppliers are there to supply fishermen/women with fishing tackle. This is completely wrong. They are there only to make a profit, no other reason, simple! They can do it by being Chinese and selling loads of stuff world wide at a small profit or they can do it by being Hardy and create a fantasy ideal and sell less stuff at a hugely inflated profit. Their raison d'etre is profit. Folks spend what they are willing to spend.
:)
 

eddleston123

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
8,523
Location
Peebles, Scottish Borders
In this months Fly Fishing and Fly Tying, they review the new Hardy Zephrus rod. Cost £599. The equivalent 'Shakey' is around £60.

So, is the hardy ten times better than the shakey. Obviously not.
Nevertheless, if you can afford the Hardy you would probably buy it for the small incremental advantages that it may give you.

More importantly,It may give you pride of ownership, and perhaps the dubious pleasure of the perceived additional status bestowed upon you by other envious anglers.

Having said all that, I am still of the firm belief that overall, game rods are sold at a premium compared to coarse rods. Market forces (as mentioned by Alexi) will always prevail.

Just my sixpence worth.


Douglas
 
Last edited:

dave b

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,142
Location
UK
I think quite a few are missing the point. Top of the range match rods are generally 13ft and have around 16 lined rings. The blank is made from the same materials as the best fly rods, the fittings probably cost as much or more, there is more whipping, more material yet a fly rod with half the materials can cost double the price.

A top match angler will demand exactly the same characteristics in a rod as a top class fly angler.

Conversely a top class match pole will coat £2K + and you can spend another £1K on spares.

It does boil down to supply and demand however there are some rods out there at a reasonable price that are absolute gems. If you did a blind test some anglers would be shocked by the findings.

Better materials, quality of carbon and expensive fitting don't always make a better rod.

When we developed the Shakespeare Mach 3 Micro Pellet Waggler rod, most people who tried the prototype thought it would sell at around £150 as it was superior in every way to the rods available from the competition at the time. They initially sold for around £80 discounted and dropped further in price after a year. It's one of the best rods I've ever used in any form of fishing and even today, 8 or 9 years later it still puts a grin on my face every time I use it.
 

luke troutstalker

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
11,359
Location
Cheshire.
It's all very well comparing poles and match rods to fly rods, but you can't hook a 16m pole over your shoulders while holding a half pound trout up at full stretch to the camera.
Plus, poles and match rods don't go with buffs, costas, or lumberjack shirts. You are not buying a rod, you are buying an image, dude!
 

graceman

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
526
Location
Warwickshire
All this makes wonder how much my 13 ft £35 Hollow spun fibreglass rod bought in 1966 would be worth today, many a Wednesday night catching barbel & chub on Thames at Marlow.
Cheese & Luncheon meat on six 6 or 8 hooks. Just dreaming.
 

caoimhin76

Active member
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
42
I believe that most of everything lies in the hands of the fisherman (person?).
I grew up in a small village, as i have posted before, the best fisherman I knew could catch 40 or 50 trout in a single day. Most of those were thrown back, but he kept a few, sold them for a pint or two in the local pub and a packet of woodbines in the shop. A small stream he was fishing, but his family was poor growing up. His father taught him how to fish, track animals and cast an eye over terrain to spot game and more importantly to understand the seasons and how these seasons affected the natural environment, from insects to birds to animals. His rod was a 10 ft fibre glass rod, always the same. Four or five flies, didn't matter if they were dry or wet I always knew it as dapping on a river, I think people may call it "Tankara style" now. A big heavy nylon line and the final few feet was a lighter line of about 4/5lbs. The rod was not important becasue he knew how to move the fly on the water and he caught fish, and lots of them. His belief was a simple mantra, a bright fly on dark days and a dark fly on bright days. He fished worm just at the start of when the river turned colour. He used to keep "blue-head" worms in his old caravan, and used to grind down red bricks and add them to the soil, he said that would make them strong and not fall off the hook.
He used to read the river, not in terms of flies but of the fish he was stalking. He walked down the river on the bank and pulled one fish after the other. I was 4 when he took me out the first time and i became fascinated watching an old man (he was probably in his late 50s at the time but time and a hard, physical life made him old).
He never changed his rod or line or anything except the fly for the hook depending on the bait. When the water was high in summer but clear he used a small trout lure, it looked like a miniature trout, that spun in the current.
From a small stream, he always rose the biggest trout consistently. For me, it meant that having a true understanding of the natural environment, the passage of time, how and when to fish meant a lot more than the equipment he used. For me that still holds true.
I'll never see anyone like that again and feel privileged to have witnessed someone that was at one with his natural enviroment. people can say that this will give you this and that and an edge, but a guy with the most rudimentary equipment who took fish and game so that he could eat, have a pint and buy a packet of "bines" as his motivation, brings more to the table than a Hardy or anything else for that matter.
For me to see a guy pull fish after fish, at least a fish over a pound every time he went out (in my company) from a small stream knew something i still strive for over 35 years later. Rods are important but other things, in my humble opinion, are much more. One could argue that they are wild trout that take anything, I would argue on smaller streams fish over a pound are much older and wiser, they have lived longer and grow much more slowly. To catch them on a regular basis meant something much more, a complete fisherman, yet with an old rod, nylon line that was probably just as old, with a couple of flies and plastic bag slung over his shoulder with yellow bailing twine used as a strap and a bine in his mouth seems much more real than the guy with several rods, complaining the action doesn't suit him or the 5 weight isn't what his last 5 weight line was, therefore his fishing is off.
A fisherman uses what he is given and transforms it into something that catches fish. What is in between that concept is the important thing, to be able to use that equipment in a manner that fools trout.
So for a rod, it is you the owner that matters and nothing more. :)
 

mrnotherone

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,416
Location
Monmouthshire
To answer the OP's question, firstly it's the market, secondly it's the market....it's always the market.

All manufacturers are in it for profit, no matter what sector of the market they target. No one makes a £700 pound barbel rod because not enough people will buy one - simple. There are enough people around the world prepared to pay £500+ for a fly rod for it to be a lucrative sector of the market for companies to compete for.

The quality question is a separate debate. For most of us quality is only one consideration - people prize brand, image, desire, affordability etc just as much when we decide on what value means to us and part with some hard earned.

I recently paid £50 (still can't quite believe it) on a Wheatly fly box. Nothing about it says 50 quid and I've "better" boxes that do the job for a fraction. BUT, I wanted it, love looking at it and fondle it when no one's looking. :whistle:
 

Guest666

Banned
Banned
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
10,692
Location
Europe but not EU
Surprised there's been no mention of economy of scale, how many coarse rods are sold compared to fly? Anyone that thinks it's only the angler that makes a difference should try fly fishing with a barbel rod for a day, to see if there are any differences
 
Last edited:

tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
4,308
I doubt that the manufacturing cost of the most expensive fly rod is much more than double the cost of producing a decent 'entry level' rod which would probably put it well under £100. I think the lifetime guarantees that the top end companies offer tell you that the cost of the rods aren't a big factor. The remaining costs are marketing and distribution, R&D, admin and accommodation and mark-up. A small company like Hardy has to spread those costs over a small number of products so its unit costs - and therefore its prices - are high. A larger company can spread them across more product so their unit costs and prices are lower.

On top of that, there's the image factor - Hardy aren't selling rods, they're selling status and image. Luckily for them that has no additional cost but it does have an additional mark-up. Simply put they can sell a rod for far more than it's value by putting their name on it.

Sadly though, fewer people seem to be buying these high-end rods - I'm not sure why - so Hardy's are in serious trouble. Revenue has dropped from £13m to £3m in three years and they made a loss for 4 out of the last 5 years. They look like a takeover target to me.
 
Last edited:

linkledger

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
1,308
Location
Hornchurch outer London
Luke you asked what blank it's Harrison with built in quiver.

I have a Seers rod built very much the same but it's very heavy by comparison to today's blank.

Might sell it to fund a new one as they are still sought after like my Normark Titan 2000 :)
 

rudolf hukka

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
2,403
Location
3rd. rock from the Sun
I doubt that the manufacturing cost of the most expensive fly rod is much more than double the cost of producing a decent 'entry level' rod which would probably put it well under £100. I think the lifetime guarantees that the top end companies offer tell you that the cost of the rods aren't a big factor. The remaining costs are marketing and distribution, R&D, admin and accommodation and mark-up. A small company like Hardy has to spread those costs over a small number of products so its unit costs - and therefore its prices - are high. A larger company can spread them across more product so their unit costs and prices are lower.

On top of that, there's the image factor - Hardy aren't selling rods, they're selling status and image. Luckily for them that has no additional cost but it does have an additional mark-up. Simply put they can sell a rod for far more than it's value by putting their name on it.

Sadly though, fewer people seem to be buying these high-end rods - I'm not sure why - so Hardy's are in serious trouble. Revenue has dropped from £13m to £3m in three years and they made a loss for 4 out of the last 5 years. They look like a takeover target to me.
Hardy were bought out by an American company called Pure Fishing Incorporated in July 2013.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/jul/02/fishing-prince-charles-hardy-greys
 
Top