Apartment Therapy got an early sneak peek from Fast Company writer Jeff Chu of a warts-and-all exposé about Design Within Reach, mapping the dramatic trajectory of the retailer from a humble San Francisco studio to a heralded catalog and online resource for those in-the-know (and of certain means), complete with large showrooms where the design illiterate found themselves presented with options once only available via more exclusive means. Controversy soon kicked in with growth and the propagation of inspired-by pieces by DWR, setting opinions ablaze…
An excerpt from the Chu's The Rise and Fall of Design Within Reach paints a picture of where the design retailer went from introducing high design to sometimes outright copying (with a few tweaks) lesser known designs:

At least a dozen of the company's current offerings are essentially unauthorized reproductions of a foreign design. "Rather than saying, 'Let's come up with something better to replace it,' they said, 'Let's come up with something similar to what people liked,' " says a former DWR employee. French designer Christophe Pillet, who didn't know that DWR was copying his Tripod lamp until Fast Company directed him to the company's online catalog, says: "They are pirates and thieves, like the Chinese -- except even the Chinese are calling me now to ask me to make something original for them."
Not all is glum, as the article notes DWR has recently removed the CEO linch pin to these sort of shady business practices, with a return to their "original in-stock-and-ready-to-ship policy" and a commitment to renewing a stronger relationship to the design community that helped build the brand in the first place: "If there are people who are particularly pissed at us, I would like their names and phone numbers," he says -- and the company is discontinuing products that could be considered knockoffs.
DWR and their Tools for Living Store have remained important venues for discussion about design with designers at their regularly hosted events, including some of our own in the past.
Is this enough to bring back the company that helped thousands like ourselves learn, see, touch and dream of owning design pieces we once could only be exposed to by enlightened friends, via design books or by traveling abroad? We hope so. Despite all the controversy, Design Within Reach remains a bridge between those aspiring beyond build-your-own furniture retailers and extreme high end furniture brands. Their catalog is still welcomed with anticipation in our household, if not to just peruse and dream like we once did before owning a single piece beyond those purchased at IKEA, found curbside or purchased via Craigslist/eBay. At the same time, we've become perennial furnishings window shoppers, where admiration has taken the place of actual retail action, DWR or otherwise
Perhaps it's the inbetween niche DWR occupies in a society of extremes that makes the retailers such a controversial figure. We as a society seem to hail and covet unsustainable affordability or expensive exclusivity in equal measure, but the middle is prone to give birth to impassioned Goldilock's ire of things being "not affordable enough" or conversely, "too cheaply made". Getting it just right is more difficult said than done in a consumerist society in a recession, and debates are often most vocal and lively in the middle of any price category, because that's where most of us orbit.
In better economic times, one could take those two steps upward for a nicer piece without as much consideration...an aspirational piece saved up for months or a year was a reasonable goal. Now, with the economy still in recovery mode, even the name "Design Within Reach" seems somewhat unsavory, even taunting, like a fruit just beyond the reach of our desires. Or perhaps this has always been the case in recent times when a great many of us no longer save like our parents once did for larger purchases, a forgotten process lost between generations in an era when we want things now, we want them at the lowest price with the highest quality…all without a wait.
There's likely as wide of reasons why people love/hate Design Within Reach as there are furniture pieces in their catalog, but put us in the camp for those cheering for a return to better times for DWR, because we think there's room and a need for that middle ground between boutique and large retailer for those always reaching for something a little better.
We fully expect and invite all of you to chime in with opinions one way or the other after reading Jeff Chu's The Rise and Fall of Design Within Reach, which is available in its entirety in the Dec/January issue of Fast Company or online here.
Thanks to Jeff Chu for sharing his piece with Apartment Therapy.
[Photograph by Jonny Valiant/Fast Company]
Comments (26)
Informative read about a company that seems to have lost its way - I think that hiring the guy who helped run Gap, Conrans North America, Esprit and Eddie Bauer into the ground was telling.
It's one thing to knock off a $4000 credenza and sell it at a $1500 pricepoint - It's another thing altogether to knock off a $4000 credenza and sell it for $4000....
...I mean, who wants to pay full price for a "Designer" object and not get the "Designer"??
In my opinion, despite bringing high design to the masses, Design Within Reach is a total hypocrisy. Almost nothing about it is "within reach"... I am an Interior Designer and I've been to countless showroom parties at DWR, they are pretentious and expensive - just on another level from the manufacturers that they copy.
Just spent my lunch hour reading Jeff Chu's article. While perhaps not as sensational as billed, it was a good read. It seems that axing DWR Kitchen and Bath is the right thing to do. DWR should focus on what it does best. Leave the knocking off and overpricing to others who try to SEE what they can BE TOO.
As explained in earlier posts at AT, I believe the "within reach" part does not refer to prices and bringing design to the masses, but rather refers to broader accessibility to high-end design previously accessible to only to architects, designers, etc.
Having bought at DWR (sale items, of course), I was unaware of the blatant copying of others' designs, e.g., the Sussex credenza featured above. Sort of like a high end Urban Outfitters. Good to know. I'm definitely less inclined to shop there now.
In the beginning, I had high hopes for Design Within Reach. They were dashed the first time I got their catalog and saw prices that were beyond the reach of anyone I knew.
The problem is that DWR hasn't evolved with the marketplace it used to be a leader in. Now, there are dozens of click & mortar retailers who are selling at much more reasonable price points without compromising design aesthetics.
Will I ever be a DWR customer again? Maybe, but I'll never, ever pay full price.
Got the marked down floor sample Air chair by Jasper Morrison to complete a mix match set of dinning chairs and am very glad i did. I don't plan on ever buying anything full price however...
still fun to walk through dwr every now and then though.
I was very dissapointed with DWR when they they added a new line exclusive to DWR and called it American Modern. The term American Modern was coined by Mary Wright, wife of well known industrial designer Russell Wright in the 1930's during the depression to promote their own designs such as the successfu dinnerware made by Steubenville Pottery and furniture range for Connat Ball. DWR, come up with your own brand/label and stop ripping off someone else's good designs. Shame on you DWR.
Interesting article. I had no idea. I bought a table from DWR (on sale) when it will still a young-ish company, but I stopped following DWR a few years ago.
It sounds like their former CEO tried to take an appealing shortcut to profitability, but thankfully was unable to sneak it by buyers and designers. If they really wanted to reduce their carbon footprint and costs by not manufacturing things in Europe for U.S. customers, there are legal and ethical ways to do this. For example, Vitra and Herman Miller (competitors) both own the licenses to manufacture and sell the same authorized reproductions in their markets (Vitra makes Eames products for Europe and HM for the US). A knock-off isn't the right way to go about it. Negotiating with designers and manufacturers is.
I hope the company can get back on track and recover. I think they'll have to branch out from the now ubiquitous classics and show some design savvy by continuing to introduce US customers to new designs/designers. But they'll have to regain the trust of the design community first.
"I think they'll (DWR) have to branch out from the now ubiquitous classics and show some design savvy by continuing to introduce US customers to new designs/designers."
I dunno...
Room and Board as well as several other mainstream retailers (Online as well as Brick & Mortar) sell authorized reproductions and have never lost the consumers trust - and the situation that kept the classic designs out of peoples hands no longer exists as Knoll no longer is "Trade Only" and Herman Miller is available almost everywhere you turn.
Many of these retailers now also have the depth and variety of product that meet folks desires and needs at various pricepoints.
DWR has not only turned off their clientelle and suppliers, but I believe it has also outlived it's purpose.
a very sad but unfortunately common story of greed & arrogance--the author seems to imply that the brand is still strong and has a fighting chance of making a come back. it's unbelievable that DRW tried to sell cheap copies of things that it had formerly carried. i noticed that the store stopped selling case study couches and beds a few years ago. i guess it was too afraid to copy those. i do hope DRW is able to clean itself up and become a company with good business ethics but perhaps that's hoping for too much in this day & age.
there is definitely still a market for DWR. It was a very poor decision to make DWR knock-offs, however. It's customers are generally reasonably knowledgable about designers and their products. In the end, that hurt DWR rep more than the profits could have benefited them.
In the end, I'll still shop there for select items. But it definitely is too expensive to buy more than a few items.
With so little of dwr's furnishings being exclusive items these days, why would anyone shop DWR when their lead-times are just as long as anywhere else and you have www.highbrowfurniture.com w/ Quickship, no tax, and free shipping???
As a former employee of Design Within Reach, I can honestly say that the company is a mess. Bad business decisions that were too ambitious at time were axed rather than salvaged...the same thing goes for the company's leadership. I've met with two of DWR's past CEO's, they all had interesting, an optimism. However that seems to have changed in recent years. Slapping your suppliers in the face by copying their designs, I never thought I'd see the day. It's bad business. When you play like this, people will want to take their toys and play elsewhere.
I have a soft spot for DWR. Years ago I would get their catalogs and newsletters, they introduced me to Modernism. And to have the opportunity to work for them was a dream come true that sadly for me turned into a nightmare. Still it is sad to see that they've lost their way. They need to find some way of regaining their integrity.
Honesty in materials. Honesty in Design. Honesty in business.
As explained in earlier posts at AT, I believe the "within reach" part does not refer to prices and bringing design to the masses, but rather refers to broader accessibility to high-end design previously accessible to only to architects, designers, etc.
Has anybody with $5000 to spend on an armchair ever found that they couldn't "access" certain designs?
To me, DWR has, for quite some time, been a joke. As said earlier who wants a $4000 knock-off of a piece that costs $4000 for the designer original? Its ridiculous. But, like your favorite undiscovered restaurant, once it gets too big it loses all of the characteristics you once loved about it. Greed ruins everything.
I think DWR is part of the problem, but isn't the problem. Modernist design's goal of integrating quality with mass production was forgotten when these same designs were sold as museum pieces and status symbols. Modernism wasn't just about "good design," it's also how that design will improve life for all (as utopian and idealistic as that sounds). More than any other store, Ikea's commitment to bringing design to large-scale production (with increasing quality) probably epitomizes what modern design is about. DWR is insignificant other than in reaffirming the (age-old, not so modern) idea that design is only available to those who can pay, and quality is not found in mass production. If it lives or dies makes no discernible difference.
Excellent point, somedudeinvicenza.
I never got my inspirations from DWR as I was into MCM, or modern in any great degree since the late 1970's while still in Junior High, thanks in part to vintage interior design books I managed to get my hands on.
That said, I can see where DWR has its place but by the same token, their prices were not within reach for the average Joe/Jane when pieces by Ray and Charles Eames, George Nelson first were produced, they were not cheap then, but were price well within means for many middle class Americans, even if they had to save up to have 4 Eames chairs at their kitchen table if nothing else, the idea with those classic designs/designers was bringing modernism down to the masses and not just to the elite, DWR appeared to do just that by bringing both iconic and current designers from all over who delved in the modern aesthetic to many who would not have ANY idea what this stuff was.
It's that latter point that is where Design Within Reach is really about, but sadly, their prices are not within middle class budgets. Go to Herman Miller for an Eames chair and get the one sold at DWR and compare prices, if the HM preproduction cost LESS than the one from DWR, then there is your answer.
All that said, I find many of the classics such as the Womb chair, the Eames plastic shell chair etc to be timeless and will not age like so many designs.
One aspect of modernism is that a lot of it looks great, but not always practical to use - but you get that in just about any style out there as well so it's not exlusive to just modernism.
I have no issue selling knock offs, just as long as the seller is being transparant about it and marking the price down accordingly, if they aren't and trying to sell it as an exclusive design w/ a price to match, not so much.
And I should say that I read the article and found it very interesting but it took me much of the afternoon with many breaks due to work to get through it.
Still in all, sad that brenner I think his name was had delusions of granduour and could not see how his tactics were actually bordering on being illegal.
I am glad that DWR is trying to turn itself around and it can survive, good for them but I probably won't cry too much if they end up folding.
Lucky for me, I acquired most of my "good design" years ago when most of these were being thrown away into oblivion because very few wanted them. I remember comments such as "why do you use cafeteria or laundromat furniture in your place?" These people were referring to my George Nelson dining table and 4 Eames DCM chairs that I got at a Salvation Army Store for $25 because I was broke and could not afford much when I left achitecture school ten years ago (even IKEA was not within reach).
Interesting discussion, everyone should check out this week's episode of Independent Lens called "Objectified" about good design. Enjoy!
www.pbs.org/independentlens/objectified/which-object-are-you.html
"Good design is as little design as possible". Dieter Rams
Completely agree with somedudeinvicenza. Thanks for posting that.
The world was built on knock-offs. Get over it.
Very well said, somedudeinvicenza.
I can't imagine this company staying in business much longer anyway. Their stock was delisted and is now trading at .21/share. Unless lots of people decide to drop cash on fancy furniture, they are done. Their ability to raise capital is hurtin'.
I also used to work at DWR, and none of this is a shock to me, or, I think, anyone at corporate. I'm certain that one of the higher ups at DWR will write AT a letter stating that everything is fine. That's what they always do. It's called "damage control". Just wait. Not only is the company out of reach, but deliberately so. Last Xmas or the one before they carried Lincoln Logs. These were the same as the logs in toy stores, but DWR charged like 5 times what everyone else did. Why? Because the people who run DWR thought they could get away with price gouging. They just thought people would pay more, because it came from DWR. DWR carried chirping birds a few Christmases ago. DWR sold them for $25 each. Walgreens had the same birds for $5. When I worked there, I asked many people "Why does good design have to be so expensive?" No one ever had an answer. The answer as to why good design has to be expensive is that DWR thinks they can get big bucks even when it's not worth it, because of the brand.
As usual with the internet cloud, everyone seems to be a bit right. If you're 26 years old and make $38,000 a year with an eye for design. you're not going to by a $4,000 Eames chair for your studio apartment. And though there's a small pack of lower income design die-hards out there who know how to buy/construct/modify vintage/used to be creative in spite of their income, most don't have the time or sensibility required. So they go to CB2 or West Elm or (gasp) Ikea and buy something slightly more interesting than they'd find at JC Penny that fits their budget and design jones. And when/if life brings those same people to a financial place where they can indulge their passion for historic design/design integrity and lifetime quality pieces, they go to DWR or similar and by a $13,598 Artichoke lamp. There is room and need for both. And, I think, more to the point, there is need and room for both authentic pieces and cheap reproductions. However, I think DWR did itself, its customers and designers a disservice by getting in to the (not so) cheap reproduction business. When you go to Ikea you know what you are getting. But DWR trying to pass off its own knock-offs as lifetime pieces with design integrity worth paying thousands of dollars for was dishonest and degraded the design community. The Fast Company DWR story had it right in the beginning. DWR is way too expensive for the average design-oriented person. But before DWR, the concepts and history of design were largely hidden deep in the interior design/trade show world. DWR has done a great job bringing the history and concept of great furniture design (if not the actual furniture) to the masses. And for that they should be applauded. I hope they get back on track and regain their integrity. I think DWR should stick to selling lifetime quality, classic but pricey pieces to the few that can afford them and continue to provide an easy design tutorial/forum for the rest of us.