Mike Redwood
Columnist
International Leather Maker
An industry colleague called me to discuss the current state of affairs and our conversation immediately went to the sad closure of Tannery Pechdo in the Millau glove district of France. Founded in 1900 it has been a constant presence for those visiting the French pavilion at leather industry trade fairs over the last few decades.
Sadly, I was unable to visit Pechdo when I was last in Millau so my knowledge is second hand, but it appears that in 1947 the Pechdo family changed the raw material to cow bellies (flanks) to make glove leather.
There is an overlap here with Pittards who were first established at the start of the 19th century and were also specialist in glove leather. Pittards steadily moving towards African hairsheep in the second half of the 20th century. They slipped into closure in 2023 (although a tannery and some other assets have re-established in Ethiopia under new ownership).
The glove industry is one of those small sectors of the leather business that serves to illuminate how highly adaptive and innovative companies struggled with the enormity of the geoeconomics changes of the last fifty years. The hasty relocation of much of the industry to emerging markets plus the swerve of business owners towards prioritising shareholder profits while ignoring the cost to their home communities was overwhelming and hard to deal with.
Both companies weathered the storm at first by a focus on highly technical leathers prized in the sports and service sectors. For Pittards that increasingly meant exporting, which was easier with lightweight glove leather that can be cost effectively airfreighted compared to side leather which has other go by sea. Given the concentrated nature of UK retail both dress (fashion) and sports gloves quickly moved production to Asia and found new suppliers locally. Pittards had to fight them with innovation and marketing. By the financial crash (2008-09) Pittards were already struggling for cash and a weakened balance sheet could not maintain the development of new products, the quality levels nor the marketing required. A slow demise followed.
Technical leathers
In latter years Pechdo appear to have moved to greater use of lamb and goat alongside bellies and their small team remained highly regarded for their technical and collaborative skills, but margins were tight and the balance sheet not strong enough to withstand a fire in a dust collector halting production for three weeks. “Death by a thousand cuts” is how it has been described.
My colleague’s considered view is that in just too many segments the quality/cost calculation no longer makes it worth shipping from Europe to Asia when local tanners can largely match the quality, and sometimes even better it.
France is more supportive of national industry than the United Kingdom, but certain sectors do not capture the eye of the policymakers. In the UK, the last sector to move overseas was military glove making and it would appear that a similar decision in Paris contributed to the problem for Pechdo.
This is more than sad, since defence spending is on the increase and secure domestic supplies are important. Military gloves are technical equipment and by going overseas they become commodities.
Caroline Krug, the owner of Pechdo since 2017, is quoted in FashionNetwork saying: “I think the future of tanneries in France is in the hands of the largest groups.” As industries mature such consolidation is common but it rarely leads to improved products and more often towards creating such commodities.
My first leather industry experience of this was with Barrow Hepburn and Gale who started their growth charge in the 1920s and again in the 1960s when they decided to dominate the UK side leather market and obtain better prices as well as achieve more R&D success through their sheer size. Both failed. Leather buyers found better leather overseas and scale does not appear to benefit innovation in leather.
Relative to Barrow Hepburn & Gale, Booth and Co sits closer to a global merchant‑industrial consolidator: powerful in hides, skins and specific finished‑leather segments, shaping flows of raw material, technology and finance rather than creating a single domestic oligarchy. As a large company it was a better example of a family‑rooted group that rode the consolidation wave, building considerable structural power across continents. It was innovative, catalysing the creation and commercialisation of chrome tanning, the dongola tannage and via Turney Bros helping the introduction of bating to eliminate dog faeces from leather processing.
Consolidation after 1946 was more typical and once sold into larger structures Booths participated in the thinning out of British tanning and associated craft capacity.
In sectors like gloving where Pittards and Pechdo existed the tanners were particularly innovative whereas we see it less in high volume sectors such as automotive leathers, albeit some are creative in other ways.
Consolidation makes leather cleaner, but less interesting
What one might say is consolidation makes leather cleaner, but less interesting — and “less interesting” is a real strategic risk.
There is no doubt a large tanning set up makes it simpler to introduce and manage cleaner tanning, traceability, waste management. On the hand creativity, novelty, and design-led innovation are almost always hindered by consolidation.
The closure of small specialist tanneries removes unique skills and reduces the palette available to designers, and this weakens leather’s ability to compete with synthetics on aesthetic and emotional grounds.
This is a battle ground that requires far more consideration as we watch global tanning capacity sliding down to 60% and below.
mike@internationalleathermaker.com
You can find Dr Mike Redwood across social media at @michaelredwood.
Publication and Copyright of “Redwood Column” remains with the publishers of International Leather Maker. The articles cannot be reproduced in any way without the express permission of the publisher. The views are those of the author and not necessarily those of ILM.
