Going back to the reply regarding the buying and selling statistics, I still can't get my head around why he should have done this. it is clear that there is no overall monetary gain. Sure, if you re-brand one cheap pipe and sell it for a good price, it may seem that way. But balance this against the total cost of all the other pipes being purchased which go God knows where, and I would doubt there has been any real overall profit.
So the question again is why risk the reputation in such a way? Perhaps the stock of actual "Astley" pipes acquired with the purchase of the shop rights is running low, or no longer exists and he wanted to retain the mystique of a bygone era of "Old London".
Mr Ezrati states that Astley were simply getting a supply of stummels from the top manufacturers, which were refinished by other artisans. I have no reason to doubt this statement. After all it is rumoured that Dunhill bring in pre-turned stummels now for finishing - and if not now they certainly did in the early days of the company. Peterson also bring in pre-turned stummels and finish them in the Sallynoggin factory.
Had it been me, and I owned the Astley brand, I would have continued in the same vein a the original shop. At the end of the day, the shop was just a retail outlet, and today, eBay is just an alternative retail outlet. However, I would have also had a very stylish website. Under this famous name, he could have been bringing in pipes from the top carvers still working today. Think of Chris Askwith, Colin Fromm, Ian Walker, Les Wood and perhaps a continued relationship with Dunhill - and these are only the UK carvers. Think of some of the top worldwide carvers who would have been honoured to be associated with such a famous name. The brand of "Astley" could have reached new heights in this expanded online world.
Unfortunately that can now only ever be a pipe dream (excuse the pun). It is true that the phoenix rose from the ashes. Perhaps this may happen again, but it will not happen under its current ownership.
