No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The House That Parcheesi Built: Selchow & Righter Company
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 June 2012
Abstract
As one of the leaders among American toy manufacturers, Selchow & Righter Company, makers of crossword and trivia games, represents one pattern of development in the toy industry. In this essay, Professor Petrik describes Selchow & Righter's progress from jobber to manufacturer, showing how the families of the company's name built the business on the strength of products developed outside the company, on the assiduous protection of trademarks, and on conservative management aimed at preserving the company for the “corporate family.” Selchow it Righter's chronicle reflects themes present in the toy industry and, especially, epitomizes those associated with companies that elected to retain family control.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1986
References
1 Galbraith, John Kenneth, The New Industrial State (New York, 1967), 21.Google Scholar
2 Heilbroner, Robert, The Limits of American Capitalism (New York, 1965), 11–14.Google Scholar
3 Toy Manufacturers of America, Inc., Fact Sheet (n.p., 1983), n.p.
4 I would like to acknowledge a Smithsonian Institution Fellowship, which made research for this article possible, and the assistance of Harold C. Livesay and Thomas R. Wessel, who read earlier drafts of this manuscript. I am indebted to Richard P. Selchow, John Nason, and Susan Maher of the Selchow & Righter Company; Julius Cogswell of New York City and Phil DeRosa of Washington, D.C, for their cooperation in adding much of their personal knowledge of the company to this paper. From Mr. DeRosa who allowed me to examine relevant transcripts in his office, to Ms. Maher who showed me the corporate archive, to Mr. Selchow and Mr. Cogswell who made time for interviews, all contributed to make the research for this piece a pleasure. Use of trademarked terms in this article is in no way to be construed as detracting from their trademark status. The games Parcheesi, Scrabble, and Trivial Pursuit are registered trademarks of Selchow & Righter.
5 “Small” here is defined as fewer than five hundred employees and conforms to the accepted definition for a small business. Currently, Selehow & Righter employs approximately four hundred workers in all phases of its production and probably employed considerably fewer in the previous century.
6 Richard P. Selchow, interviews with author, 21 Feb. and 5 June 1984, Bayshore, N.Y.; New York, vol. 367, p. 316, pt. 2, R. G. Dun Collection, Baker Library, Harvard Business School, Boston, Mass.
7 R. G. Dun & Co. Collection, New York, vol. 367, p. 316, pt. 2.
8 Ibid. Family records and Dun company reports disagree on the date of Frederick Selchow's death—1864 versus 1862-and no record remains of the careers of Elisha Selchow's two brothers except that of Frederick Jr.'s death in the early 1860s.
9 Ibid.
10 Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Chaffee & Selchow Manufacturing Co., 303 U.S. 151 (New York. Cir. 1904)Google Scholar Five hundred dollars was a princely sum, representing more than six months'wages for nineteenthcentury white collar workers.
11 R. G. Dun & Co. Collection, New York, vol. 233, p. 913.
12 Ibid.
13 R. G. Dun & Co. Collection, New York, vol. 367, p. 400.
14 Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 3 Feb. 1909; Little Nine Partners Historical Society Record 1 (1968)Google Scholar; Julius Cogswell, interview with author, 4 June 1984, Bayshore, N.Y.
15 Chandler, Alfred D. Jr,The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, Mass., 1977), 220.Google Scholar
16 R. G. Dun & Co. Collection, New York, vol. 367, p. 400P.
17 Ibid., pp. 301B, 400E.
18 Ibid., p. 400A14; Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 8277 U.S. 223 (1911). It appears that the partners, and later, Essanar, were paid 10.5 cents for every game sold.
18 Selchow & Righter Catalog. 1877-1878, 9; R. G. Dun & Co. Collection, Massachusetts, vol. 81, p. 106.
20 Selchow & Righter Catalog, 1885, 5.
21 Selchow & Righter Co. vs. James S. Baker Co., 93 New York Kep. 35, 59-63 (1895)Google Scholar. Sliced Animals and Sliced Birds had a long career at the company. In 1933, hoth puzzles were reissued and stayed in the line until the mid-1950s.
22 American Agriculturalist 38 (Oct. 1879): 433–34.Google Scholar For examples, see Selchow & Righter Company Catalogs, 1877, 1885, 1890, and 1895; Miscellaneous circulars, 1890s, Selchow & Righter Company Archives.
23 McClintock, Incz and McClintock, Marshall, Toys in America (Washington, D.C., 1961), 195–96;Google ScholarBrooklyn Daily Eagle, 9 Feb. 1909.
24 Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Chaffee & Selchow Manufacturing Co., 163-64 (plaintiff's record). Although it is difficult to ascertain what role Frederick Selchow played in the Chaffee and Selchow business, it seems his position within the Selchow family was ambiguous. Two pieces of evidence argue for Frederick's less than exalted status. First, he did not testify at all during the trademark litigation, although he was an obvious witness to the agreements and dealings of the firm and his participation in those arrangements. Second, when the ownership of the Parcheesi trademark was divided, Frederick Selehow received exactly half of what the other heirs received, suggesting that, perhaps, he received some of his portion during his lifetime as capital for the Chaffee and Selchow venture. Frederick's failure, certainly no black mark in the Gilded Age, apparently only hindered him briefly and barely slowed his progress. Frederick, in fact, became an officer in the Essanar Corporation.
25 Ibid., 1-11, 30-36 (plaintiff's record); 3, 31-32, 70, 93-95, 153-57, 163-64 (defendant's record); Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 585. The company's second major court appearance involved Frederick Selchow's involvement with Chaffee Manufacturing and another battle over the Parcheesi trademark. The company lost its legal battle but a change in trademark statute in 1905 enabled the company to prove its ownership on the basis of usage.
26 Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 256-58.
27 The First Century of the Selchow & Righter Company, 1867-1968 (n.p., n.d.); Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 93.
28 Julius Cogswell, interview with author, 4 June 1984.
29 Livesay, Harold C. and Porter, Glenn, Merchants and Manufacturers (Baltimore, Md., 1971), 27-29; 214–27Google Scholar; Chandler, The Visible Hand, 216-24.
30 Selehow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 61, 223. While the royalties from the firm's sales leader were more than sufficient, the increased number of shareholders in Essanar decreased the individual amount to each owner.
31 NRA Price Lists, 1932-35, Selchow & Righter Company Archives; Miscellaneous memo, n.p. The company sold to wholesalers as the separate price lists lor jobbers and retailers indicate, but Harriet Righter's memo suggests that she saw these buyers dwindling and courted hardware dealers instead. Unfortunately, hardware people were still doing the bulk of their business with jobbers.
32 Selehow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 568.
33 Anderson, L. K., “Repeat Sales: Taking a Lesson from Dated Coffee, Parcheesi Is Banded and Sales Are Boosted 350 Per Cent, ” Printer's Ink 42 (18 April 1935): 56–57Google Scholar; Peterson, Eldridge, “A 66-Year-Old Product Fights It Out with a Newcomer,” Printer's Ink 39 (19 Oct. 1933): 33–36Google Scholar; Scrapbook, Selchow & Righter Company Archives.
34 Anderson, “Repeat Sales,” 56-57; Miscellaneous Letter, Selchow & Righter Company Archives.
35 Richard Selchow, interview with author, 5 June 1984. It is not clear how many years elapsed between dividends for the company. Certainly, Essanar paid dividends to the two families, but the company apparently did not. As is the case with any closely held company, this kind of information is sketchy. Suffice it to say that Selchow & Righter's financial position had improved.
36 Miscellaneous memo, n.d., u.p., Selchow & Righter Company Archives.
37 Miscellaneous files and clippings, Selchow & Righter Company Archives.
38 Selchow & Righter Co. vs. Western Printing & Lithography Co. and Whitman Publishing Co., 203-13.
39 Ibid., 786.
40 Wallace, Robert, “A Man Makes a Best-Selling Game—Scrabble—and Achieves His Ambition (Spelled Out Above),” Life Magazine 35 (14 Dec. 1952): 101–12Google Scholar; The First Century of the Selchow & Righter Company.
41 Wallace, “A Man Makes a Best-Selling Game,” 101-12.
42 The United States Patent Quarterly (Washington, D.C., 1958), 117: 396–401.Google Scholar As it happened, Parker Brothers' Monopoly became the case that tested the merits of the patent court's words, with disastrous results for Parker.
43 Richard Selchow, interview with author, 21 Feb. 1984.
44 Susan Maher, interview with author, 5 June 1984, Bayshore, N.Y. Had it not been for Trivial Pursuit's enormous success, the company would have concentrated on developing a new mystery game or improving Whodunit.
45 Ibid. Like the other Selchow sons and grandsons, Richard Selchow chose a different business career. He had been involved with the business side of semiconductor manufacture for Sperry Rand Corporation, with plastics manufacture with P.M. Industries, and with the business management of Christ Episcopal Church in Greenwich, Conn.
46 Richard Selchow, interviews with author, 21 Feb., 5 June 1984.
47 Ibid.
48 Game Merchandising 1 (Feb. 1981): 70.Google Scholar
49 Ibid. 2 (May 1982): 32.
50 Selchow & Righter Catalogs, 1981, 1982, 1983; Playthings 81 (Sept. 1983): 32.Google Scholar
51 Playthings 81 (Jan. 1983): 9.Google Scholar
52 Ibid. (Sept. 1983): 69.
53 Selchow & Righter Catalog, 1983, 15.
54 Playthings 81 (Feb. 1983): 54.Google Scholar