The Woolmark Company, New York, showcased its licensed Total Easy Care Wool at a Wash Me Wool
reception held during the recent Yarn Fair International. Total Easy Care Wool was first introduced
to the American apparel industry in August.
(See Technology Advances At Expofil, ATI August 1999). According to the company, it is the
next step in making wool a high-performance fiber.As a follow-up technological advancement to
washable wool, Total Easy Care Wool can be machine washed at 40°F and tumble dried on low heat. It
is being marketed globally. In 1998, more than 3 million garments were merchandised at
retail.Working through the supply chain from spinner, knitter and weaver, to garment manufacturer
and retailer, The Woolmark Company offers technical advice and assistance through each stage of
production. Approved Woolmark Total Easy Care garments will not shrink or loose shape even after as
many as 50 washings. The fabrics retain their soft wooly hand and luster. Easy Care
DistributionIn this country, The Kent Manufacturing Co., Pickens, S.C., is selling worsted yarns.
Jasco Fabrics has a line of knitted fabrics for cut and sew. Garments are available for both men
and women from Liz Claiborne. Lands End and Nova Knitting are also developing apparel in Total Easy
Care Wool.Worldwide, there are more than 100 spinners supplying machine washable yarns. With 20,
Italy leads the list. Grignasco, Lanerossi, Luigi Botto, Lineapiu and Zegna Baruffa are some of the
names.Schoeller of Germany; Amalric and Christory of France; John Smedley, LaidlawandFairgrieve,
Patons and Thomas Ramsden from the United Kingdom are other European spinners on the Woolmark list.
There are also 16 companies from China, 11 from Taiwan and five from Japan.The weavers selling
machine washable wool fabrics are primarily from European countries. Lepoutre, France; Dechamps.
Germany; Luigi Botto, Lanerossi and Pecci, Italy; and the Parkland Group, the United Kingdom, are
some companies listed. Easy Care DevelopmentTotal Easy Care Wool has been developed in
response to the influence of sportswear and casual attire, and consumer demands for easy care
apparel.Consumers have been asking for washable wool in a range of wardrobe items and were
answering their call with the most tremendous advancement yet washable wool wovens, said Stephanie
Garbarini, general manager, marketing communications and retail for The Woolmark Company.
“Woolmark’s Total Easy Care Wool now allows consumers to wash wool sweaters and trousers at home
for the first time.”The 1999 revised edition of The Woolmark Company’s report, “Easy Care in Wool,”
focuses on five areas: the demand for easy care products; global growth in laundry appliances;
manufacturing industry capacity; Woolmark test methods and labeling; and a global source guide. It
is available from the Woolmark Company for $90 for licensees and $120 for nonlicensees.

October 1999

As the industry evolves into technology driven businesses, an increasing number of companies are
reaching a critical pain threshold in needing to control and manage their vast amounts of digital
media assets.Technically speaking, a digital asset is any form of media that has been turned into a
binary source. Digital assets, which for textile mills include everything from artwork, logos and
photos to PowerPoint presentations, text documents and even e-mail, are proving to be valuable
assets in terms of both productivity and company valuation. However, an asset is only an asset when
you can find it, or you know that you have it in the first place.In this, the first of a two-part
series, we will review the art and science of digital asset management. Digital Asset
ManagementAccording to GISTICS research, an average of $8,200 per person per year is spent on file
management activities, including searching, verification, organization, back-up and security.
Creative professionals spend an average of one out of every 10 hours of their time on file
management.Canto Software, developers of asset management software, reports that the average media
user manages over 7,000 files distributed over a variety of storage mediums. The average creative
person looks for a media file 83 times a week and fails to find it 35 percent of the time. Their
research shows that digital asset management solutions will drop that to figure to 5 percent.
Digital asset management (DAM) saves not just time, but money.Where do the savings come from Labor
reduction is a primary contribution, allowing employees to spend less time locating assets and more
time working on current projects. Another key benefit is that the ability to find and research
existing work facilitates the reuse of valuable creative assets from previous projects. A
by-product of this benefit is faster development. The ability to take advantage of work performed
on prior projects will reduce turnaround time.The DAM process insures that only approved brand
elements are used and are used in the proper context. The process automates the workflow, with the
ability to keep track of versions or routing the asset to its next destination. DAM helps to build
relationships by supporting the ability to share assets over an extranet with clients and
suppliers. In addition, with the ability to allow clients or other departments to observe creative
works in progress, DAM fosters communication and collaboration. While the term DAM implies its use
for computer-generated artwork, a growing number of textile mills and product manufacturers are
finding DAM applications an ideal tool for cataloging the years of hand-drawn artwork they have
purchased as a part of each new development season.These companies have begun scanning or
photographing these assets and building a database that not only makes it easy to find and use
purchased assets, but provides a valuable tool for insurance valuation. The Spectrum Of
ApplicationsA DAM application is simply a tool for organizing digital media assets for storage and
retrieval. When searching for a digital asset management system, the first thing to identify is
your objective. Let the priority of one or more of these goals be your guiding principle in sorting
through the facts and marketing hype. The marketplace offers a broad range of solutions, ranging
from individual workstations to enterprise-wide solutions.Desktop solutions represent the simplest
type of DAM. They serve the needs of individual users with relatively small collections of content.
This model can be conformed to a handful of stations in a low-security file-sharing network and
sometimes even to larger studios, if one person is managing one type of media asset. While desktop
solutions allow for descriptions and keyword searches, they typically only catalog thumbnails and
references to the actual files, as opposed to the files themselves.A collaborative solution is the
likely choice if your objective is sharing work-in-progress and finished media among a tightly knit
group of co-workers. The content itself can be stored on a central server or across individual
workstations including offline storage, such as CD-ROMs and tape cartridges. Other offerings
include annotation capabilities and strong communications support for efficiently transferring
files between remote users. Process-oriented solutions focus on workflow, orbiting around a
centralized database of project management information that allows a producer to assign, prioritize
and track a projects progress across the entire production team, including edits, conversions and
sign-offs. Given that workflow varies greatly across different types of enterprises,
process-centric solutions are often tailored to the needs of specific vertical
markets.Industry-centric solutions extend the sharing of an enterprises media assets to suppliers,
contractors and other partners. Such systems include high-level security that allows the primary
enterprise to work with multiple parties without commingling proprietary assets. Merchant-centric
solutions for e-commerce enable an enterprise to serve a high volume of on-line customers who will
browse and purchase media assets. Merchant-centric systems routinely process secure financial
transactions, drive order fulfillment processes, interface with inventory systems and report to
accounting systems that can manage things like royalty payments to represented parties.Some
businesses find that one vendor can handle all of their needs, while others implement multiple
systems according to the disparate needs of various departments. In the latter case, the use of an
open system architecture can allow these multiple systems to act on one central repository of
data. Catalogs vs. RepositoriesDAM applications are characterized by architectural
differences. The playing field can be subdivided into two basic categories, media catalogs and
asset repositories.The primary characteristic of media catalogs is the use of proxies, such as
thumbnails, in an indexed database that can be quickly searched by keyword. The actual source files
are left untouched and under control of the operating system. The benefits of media catalogs
include low cost, ease of installation and administration, and scalability across multiple
divisions of an enterprise. Since media catalogs do not actually manage the content itself, anyone
with system access can typically view, change, move or delete any content element. This usually
precludes such features as check-in/check-out of content, rights management and automatic
versioning (the latest version of a print, for example). Media catalogs can also become sluggish
with large catalogs, especially if distributed across multiple servers or geographic locations.In
asset repositories the content itself is physically stored inside a secure database. Benefits
include security levels, replication, referential integrity, centralized data management and full
hierarchical storage management and disaster recovery.Solutions based on the asset repository model
are ideal when systematizing studios with industrial workflow, managing rights and permissions such
as the intellectual property of either your company or a third party and structuring global access
by employees, contractors, suppliers, partners and customers.This centralization of all assets into
a single or distributed storehouse for safekeeping requires significantly higher performance
hardware such as high-end UNIX servers, formidable on-line storage and high-speed networks.
According to a report in New Media Magazine, it also demands a capital investment 10 to 50 times
that associated with media catalogs, as well as a commensurately higher level of system
administration. Off-The-Shelf Or CustomAnother important question to be answered is how much
technical expertise is required in the installation and maintenance of a DAM solution. Much like
CAD systems, the selection ranges from totally integrated off-the-shelf packages to custom
solutions. Since the best-integrated application suites are built around process knowledge, they
are ideal for business models centered on methodologies well established within a given industry.
Such solutions are often easy enough to install that they can be set up by end users.The middle
ground is populated by higher-level prebuilt components, enabling a business to use its more unique
business knowledge in configuring a partially customized application. While the orchestration of
prebuilt components will require modest knowledge of systems integration, this genre represents an
excellent vehicle for creating a uniquely branded service.On the high end of the spectrum are
universal server databases and search engines that enable systems integrators to assemble the best
of breed for their unique needs. Each consists of a self-contained module automating one business
function or the activities of a single employee.

October 1999

Ciba Specialty Chemicals Inc., Switzerland, reported that for the period ended June 30, 1999, sales
rose 2 percent in Swiss francs, or 4 percent in local currencies, to CHF 4.374 billion.Operating
income declined by 27 percent in Swiss francs, or 22 percent in currency-adjusted terms. EBItdA
(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) fell 14 percent in Swiss francs,
or 10 percent in local currencies.Net income for the first six months of 1999 amounted to CHF 121
million, or CHF 1.82 per share earnings.Consoltex Group Inc., Montreal, recently announced its
results for the quarter ended June 30, 1999. The company reported net earnings of $0.3 million, or
$0.02 per share, during the quarter, compared to earnings of $4.9 million, or $0.29 per share,
during the same quarter in 1998.Culp Inc., High Point, N.C., reported net income of $1.6 million
for the first quarter of its 2000 fiscal year.For the first three months ended August 1, 1999, Culp
reported a net sales increase to $115.9 million, compared with $110.7 million a year ago. The
company reported net income for the quarter of $1.6 million, or $0.13 per diluted share, compared
with a net loss of $2.6 million, or $0.20 per diluted share in 1998.The Dixie Group Inc.,
Chattanooga, Tenn., recently reported record earnings from continuing operations of $4.1 million,
or $0.35 per share, for the second quarter ended June 26, 1999. This represents an increase in
earnings per share of 25 percent over the same period in 1998, when the company reported $3.3
million, or $0.28 per share, for continuing operations.Dixie reported record sales as a
floorcovering company of $152.1 million for the second quarter of 1999, an increase of 17 percent
over the $130.5 million in the second quarter of 1998.Kellwood Co., St Louis, reported sales and
net earnings for the first quarter ended July 1, 1999.Sales for the quarter were $470,575,000, down
2.6 percent from $483,283,000 in 1998. Net earnings for the quarter increased 10.5 percent to
$9,557,000, or $0.34 per share, up from $8,652,000, or $0.32 per share in 1998.Pillowtex Corp.,
Dallas, announced operating results for the companys second quarter ended July 3, 1999.Net earnings
for the second quarter were $6.2 million, or $0.40 per diluted share, as compared to $6.5 million,
or $0.42 per diluted share in 1998. Net earnings for the first six months of fiscal 1999 were $11
million, or $0.71 per diluted share, as compared to $11.7 million, or $0.75 per diluted share, for
the first six months of 1998.Second quarter sales of $362.5 million were 9.1-percent higher than
the $332.1 million reported for the comparable quarter a year ago. Sales for the first six months
of fiscal 1999 of $731 million were 4.7-percent higher than the $698.4 million reported for the
first six months of 1998.Polymer Group Inc. (PGI), North Charleston, S.C., recently announced
results of operations for the companys second quarter ended July 3, 1999.Net sales for the second
quarter increased 8.6 percent to $223.8 million, up from $206.1 million in the second quarter of
1998.For the first six months of 1999, net sales increased 8.6 percent, or $34.5 million, compared
to $434 million, up from $399.4 million during the second quarter of 1998.Gross profit for the
second quarter increased $10 million, or 19 percent, to $61.9 million, up from $51.9 million during
the second quarter of 1998.Second quarter net income increased 38.5 percent to $8.6 million, or
$0.27 per share, versus $0.20 per share in the second quarter of 1998.Ridgeview Inc., Newton, N.C.,
announced a net loss for the second quarter of 1999 of $345,000, or $0.11 per share, compared to a
net loss of $1.5 million, or $0.49 per share during the same period in 1998.Net sales for the
quarter were $23.8 million, compared to $21.3 million for the same period in 1998, an increase of
11.7 percent.For the six months ended June 30, 1999, net sales increased 14.8 percent to $47.7
million compared to $41.6 million for the same period in 1998. The net loss for the first six
months was $2.3 million, or $0.77 per share, compared to a loss of $1.4 million, or $0.46 per share
for the same period in 1998.Synthetic Industries Inc., Chickamauga, Ga., recently reported results
for the fiscal 1999 third quarter ended June 30,1999. Net sales in the quarter were $104.5 million
in the third fiscal quarter of fiscal 1998.Operating income of $16.2 million in the third quarter
of fiscal 1999 reflects $0.9 million in previously announced plant combination costs. Excluding
these costs, operating income for the fiscal 1999 third quarter was $17.1 million as compared to
$17.8 million in the fiscal 1998 third quarter. Net income in the third quarter of fiscal 1999 was
$7.3 million, or $0.81 per diluted share. This is compared to $7.8 million, or $0.87 per diluted
share, in the same period of 1998.Excluding the plant combination costs, net income in the third
quarter of fiscal 1999 was $7.9 million, or $0.87 per diluted share.

October 1999