A second product, or more of the first
Updated
On this page6
The asymmetry
A scheduled process is established for a specific product. Change the formulation materially and you need another one, with the cost and the lead time that implies. Doubling the volume of an existing product needs neither. That is a strong argument for depth before breadth in this craft, and it is a structural reason rather than a marketing preference.
What a second product actually costs
- A second process, with its own lead time against the same picking window.
- A second label, with its own artwork and print run.
- A second set of ingredients bought in case quantities.
- A second line in every batch log and every stock count.
None of that is prohibitive and all of it is routinely underestimated, usually because the second product is a small variation and feels like a small decision.
When breadth is right anyway
A relish made from the seconds of your main line is a second product that costs you almost nothing in input and solves a quality problem at the same time. A fermented line beside a quick-pickled one is a bigger step, because it is a second craft with its own failures and its own cold chain, not a second recipe.
Ask what the buyer wants
A wholesale buyer usually wants reliable supply of one thing before they want a range, and a maker who turns up with four products and no consistency has answered a question nobody asked. Depth first is also usually what the customer is buying.
Volume has its own ceiling, though
Depth-first is the right default and it is not unlimited, because more of the first product runs into the constraints the previous page describes: hands during the picking window, surfaces to tend, and cash bought a season ahead. The point at which a second product starts to look attractive is usually the point at which those are binding, and a second product that uses a different harvest window can relieve them rather than competing for the same weeks.