CPG Deep Dive: Foxtrot, Walmart, Tiktok, and VC

Foxtrot Market’s failure stemmed from fundamental misalignments with the convenience store model. Initially, Foxtrot aimed to differentiate with a unique, upscale product mix and aesthetic appeal. However, their strategy overlooked the essential role of meeting everyday consumer needs which is crucial for driving frequent customer visits. Foxtrot focused on specialty items rather than staples like bread, milk, and convenient services, which are critical for repeat business in the convenience sector. What is Foxtrot? The neighborhood stop focused on locally sourced products, foodservice, grab-and-go item in a “cozy, upscale neighborhood market feel.”

While Foxtrot offered an appealing store design and high-end products, it failed to integrate essential convenience items and services that fulfill daily consumer needs and compete with traditional and app-based delivery services. The lack of basic convenience store elements, such as walk-in coolers and gas pumps, and the shift towards city center locations with high rents and declining foot traffic, further strained their operations.

Ultimately, Foxtrot’s business model was not sustainable in the highly competitive convenience store market. I believe that Foxtrot’s failure is a part of a much larger narrative that also includes the potential shelving of TikTok as an advertising channel, retail media’s increasing costs (96% of CPGs are managing spend on three or more networks), and the galvanizing of CPG distribution at the top of the market (Walmart, Costco, and Kroger).

But there is another valuable insight to consider here, CPG has abandoned affordability. And as a result, outside of closed circle of an exceptional food, drink, and snack food brands, the window is closing.

The landscape for CPG brands is undergoing a seismic shift, marked by increased challenges in distribution avenues, market consolidation by retail giants, diminishing venture capital interest, and heightened cost pressures. This confluence of factors is rapidly closing the window of opportunity for CPG brands to achieve widespread distribution and visibility. In the Argument for CPG Investing, I laid out the promising prospects for investing in the grocery, CPG, and meal delivery sectors, projecting significant growth and advising strategic investment.

By 2027, food and beverage are expected to constitute 21.5% of eCommerce, up from less than 14%, illustrating a major shift towards grocery and food CPG as smarter investments compared to the unstable fashion and accessory sectors. However, a significant caveat in the marketability of CPG products through major channels is the consumers’ overwhelming preference for purchasing groceries from established retailer websites and apps, as opposed to new-age online marketplaces or direct brand channels. This preference indicates a deep trust in traditional grocery retailers, which poses a challenge for new entrants or smaller brands in gaining significant market traction independently. I went on to explain that mega retailers like Kroger and Walmart lead in leveraging their established platforms for online grocery sales, illustrating the importance of these major channels in shaping the digital grocery landscape. This dynamic creates a barrier for new brands and underscores the critical role of strategic partnerships and platform choice in the success of CPG companies in the eCommerce realm.

The Retail Dominance of Major Players

Recent data by Supermarket News reveals a significant concentration of CPG spending, with Walmart alone capturing over 21% of all U.S. CPG expenditures. This dominance is closely followed by Costco and Kroger, creating formidable barriers for smaller CPG companies seeking shelf space. The retailer preference is regional, according to data found on Numerator:

Food and mass retailers capture over half of all CPG sales across the country, but channel preferences differ regionally. Shoppers in the Western United States spend significantly more at club retailers, Midwesterners favor mass merchandisers, Southerners have slightly less distinct preferences, but over-index at dollar stores, while shoppers in the Northeast spend more at traditional grocery stores.

Across the U.S., the top five retailers for CPG spending are Walmart (21.2%), Costco (7.8%), Kroger (6.9%), Amazon (5.3%), and Albertsons (4.3%). The dominance of these retailers not only limits the visibility of smaller brands but also dictates the terms of market engagement, often favoring established brands with proven sales records. One great example of this is electrolyte-based CPG brand LMNT:

Disclaimer: 2PM is an investor in LMNT

LMNT has exemplified how a strategic combination of native eCommerce and broad distribution through giants like Walmart and Amazon can catapult a CPG brand to profitable, enterprise-level growth. Initially leveraging its direct-to-consumer model, LMNT established a robust online presence that facilitated direct relationships with consumers, fostering brand loyalty and collecting invaluable customer data. This strong foundation enabled them to expand into extensive retail distribution channels effectively.

The introduction of LMNT-based sparkling waters is a calculated move to capitalize on their established market presence and the operational synergies provided by Walmart and Amazon. These platforms not only offer massive visibility but also ensure streamlined logistics and distribution, crucial for meeting the demand spikes typical for successful CPG products.

With a potent mix of strong brand identity, high consumer awareness, and a passionate fanbase, LMNT has crafted a winning playbook for CPG growth. This strategy is particularly effective in today’s competitive market, where establishing a significant retail and digital footprint is essential for long-term success.

The Impact of Venture-backed Retail Closures

The closure of Foxtrot market highlights the volatility and uncertainty facing new market entrants reliant on such platforms for growth. Foxtrot was instrumental in testing and promoting innovative CPG products like Graza, giving nascent brands crucial consumer exposure. According to a recent AdExchanger article and described by Paul Voge, CEO of Aura Bora, “There are very few retailers willing to roll the dice on a new brand with unproven sales, track record, margins etc.” The loss of such an incubator platform exacerbates the challenge for emerging brands to find supportive retail environments conducive to growth and experimentation. The retailer was ideologically aligned with many of the DTC brands that it was known to feature:

Foxtrot was of the same age and temperament as its digital-native brands, says Becca Millstein, co-founder and CEO of the DTC darling tinned fish brand Fishwife. “It shared our mindset of real nimbleness and creativity and fast growth, which is somewhat unique to startup culture.”

The marriage between VC and DTC brands has faced significant challenges in recent years primarily due to a shift in the economic landscape and evolving market dynamics. Initially, DTC brands thrived, leveraging VC funding to grow rapidly without the immediate need for profitability. This strategy capitalized on low digital marketing costs and the novelty of direct online sales, which promised higher margins by bypassing traditional retailers.

However, as interest rates increased and the economic environment tightened, the sustainability of these DTC brands came under scrutiny. Investors, who were once content with growth at any cost, began demanding viable paths to profitability. Simultaneously, the cost of digital advertising surged, diminishing the return on investment for customer acquisition and inflating the cost of maintaining growth.

This influenced the growth of retail media as a pathway for growth.

These factors, combined with a realignment of consumer spending away from non-essential purchases, led to a recalibration of the value of DTC brands, many of which saw their market valuations plummet or had to revert to private ownership to restructure away from public market pressures. This reality check marked a significant downturn in the VC-DTC relationship, highlighting the need for DTC models to adapt to a more financially sustainable approach.

Consumer Dynamics and Economic Pressures

The current economic climate further complicates the landscape. While some premium brands like Unilever and Reckitt Benckiser are experiencing growth, others face stiff resistance. Nestlé, for instance, reported a decline in sales volumes, which the company attributes to “weak US demand as well as intense price competition in the frozen food category” (eMarketer, 2024). This bifurcation in consumer behavior reflects a broader trend where a segment of the market gravitates toward premium brands, while a larger and far more substantial portion continues to favor private labels and discount alternatives amid ongoing economic uncertainties and inflation.

Foxtrot Market’s failure stemmed from fundamental misalignments with the convenience store model but also, larger economic pressures contributed.

In today’s economic landscape, rising cost pressures are heightening the demand for affordable products over luxury goods, a shift driven by several compelling factors. First, inflation rates have surged globally, significantly impacting household budgets. In the U.S., the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose 6.5% over the past year, marking a substantial increase in the cost of living and squeezing consumer spending power (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2023). As disposable incomes shrink, consumers are increasingly seeking value-driven purchases, rather than premium, high-cost options.

Moreover, wage growth has not kept pace with inflation, effectively eroding real incomes. This disparity between wage increases and inflation rates compels consumers to prioritize essential and budget-friendly goods. According to a Pew Research Center analysis, about 70% of Americans consider inflation a major threat to their financial well-being, influencing their shift towards more economically priced products.

The economic uncertainty spurred by these trends has led to a cautious consumer approach. Luxury goods (to include CPG), often considered discretionary expenditures, are among the first to be curtailed in times of financial strain. In contrast, affordable products are perceived as both necessary and prudent choices in uncertain economic times, supporting the need for companies to adjust their product offerings to meet the increasing demand for affordability.

Waning Investment and the Need for Marketing Innovation

With cooling interest from venture capital and tighter debt markets, the financial squeeze forces CPG companies to rethink their strategies and seek out new methods for consumer engagement and product launch. Innovative marketing and product diversification are becoming critical as brands navigate the complexities of a market where traditional advertising costs are escalating and traditional retail platforms are becoming less accessible.

The potential ban or divestiture of TikTok in the U.S. could also significantly disrupt the marketing strategies of many brands, particularly those that have leveraged the platform’s unique algorithm for product discovery and customer engagement. TikTok has become a vital tool for reaching younger demographics, who often discover new products through viral content and influencer collaborations. The platform’s highly personalized content feed effectively captures user attention, making it an invaluable asset for brands aiming to introduce new products or reinvigorate interest in existing ones. According to a recently published report on Consumer Goods:

According to a TikTok CPG Insights survey conducted last year, 79% of millennials and 75% of Gen-Zers discover new CPG products more often after joining TikTok, and 3 in 4 make the majority of their household purchase decisions right on the platform. Of all CPG products being marketed on TikTok, the top three categories are Food & Beverage (91%), Personal Care (80%), and Household Care (73%).

Permanently losing TikTok could stifle these brands’ ability to reach large audiences quickly and cost-effectively, as no other platform offers the same level of organic reach and engagement. Consequently, brands might face higher marketing costs and lower efficiency in their campaigns elsewhere. This could hinder not only discovery but also repeat purchases, as TikTok’s continuous engagement keeps products top of mind among consumers, encouraging them to come back and buy again.

****

DTC investment in 2021 reached $5 billion. By 2023, that number fell to $130 million. Meanwhile, Walmart has launched its proxy to the luxury CPG brands that rely so heavily on Foxtrot, Thrive Market, TikTok and retail media: it’s called BetterGoods.

While Walmart executives said they weren’t marketing Better Goods specifically to higher-income consumers, they acknowledged that the assortment might appeal to those shoppers.

Looking forward, the ability of CPG brands to thrive will hinge on their adaptability to these evolving market conditions. The consolidation of retail power, changing consumer preferences, and economic pressures demand a strategic recalibration from CPG brands. Success in this new era will likely depend on leveraging digital marketing channels, understanding nuanced consumer behaviors, and delivering innovative products that resonate with a diverse consumer base. The path forward for CPG brands is fraught with challenges but also ripe with opportunities for those that can navigate this complex landscape with agility and strategic insight.

Веб Смит

Deep Dive: Tesla Bros, An Impartial Analysis

There were several aspects of Elon Musk’s personality that I picked up on when reading Walter Isaacson’s eponymous book. My short notes from the book included: “Elon seemed destined to do what he’s done.” And, “[Elon Musk] was an excellent book written about a man whose life was far from over.” But even in my notes, I improperly communicated what I understand about him. The average person hears “destined to do…” and believes that the skids were greased for him. I meant precisely the opposite. The first-generation American was as far from a scion as one could be despite how often the general media portrayed his parenting-to-career pipeline. He did have it hard growing up, he has an extraordinarily high risk tolerance, he’d been punched in the face (a fact that the average person cannot relate to), he’d been betrayed a number of times, he probably suffers a litany of mental health issues, and his mind works at a different pace and process than the vast majority of ours.

I think that it’s important to preface my analysis with the above because, though not a true journalist, I was more prepared for a one on one interview than Don Lemon was. Why? I read that book. The biography contextualized much of what I know of his companies, his work style, and him. It’s precisely because of that work style that I am confident in my belief that he would never consider what I propose. But it would be an “entertaining outcome” to consider.

The last time that I wrote about Tesla was in 2018 and in the shallow context of luxury, consumer psychographics, and DTC mechanics. I explained:

American manufacturers who are competing in the luxury space may not realize it yet. Despite Tesla’s many flaws in logistics and leadership, Tesla’s eCommerce operations have laid the groundwork to become a top of mind luxury product.

I believe Tesla’s core problem is less about Elon Musk’s scattered attention and perceived persona. I do believe that the car brand is no longer aspirational, the technologies once considered luxurious are more commonplace, and the novelty of well-engineered electric vehicles has gone down-market, cross-market, and up-market – each at Tesla’s expense.

It’s my belief that the company can correct this if it altogether reconsiders its pursuit of selling autonomous robo taxis. It would be an “investment thesis pivot,” a phrase coined by Barclays analyst, Dan Levy. This presents an alternative strategy, the “Tesla Bros” strategy.

The “Tesla Bros” Strategy: Rivian and Lucid

Tesla is at a crossroads. Despite its Model Y market share and its persisting brand prestige, it faces mounting challenges from both established automotive giants like Hyundai, Volkswagen, BMW, and Ford and emerging competitors – foreign and domestic. Look no further than BYD and Lucid. Here is a great snapshot of the best-selling EVs.

Graph No. 1 of 5

Tesla’s path to sustained dominance may lie in strategic acquisitions. Of the top of mind, acquiring Rivian and Lucid could be a masterstroke to bolster Tesla’s position as a luxury manufacturer against traditional American manufacturers, European luxury brands, and China’s rapidly ascending BYD brand. Review graph No. 3 of 5 for context.

Acquiring Rivian and Lucid could strategically reposition Tesla as “aspirational” in the upscale EV market while rejuvenating its model lineup and breaking the monotony of its current offerings. This could also improve pricing integrity and down market sales. Rivian’s adventure-oriented electric trucks and SUVs, alongside Lucid’s luxury sedans known for cutting-edge interior design, agility, battery technology, would provide Tesla with fresh, innovative models that cater to diverse consumer segments. The Model 3 and Model Y models continue to buoy Tesla’s volume.

Graph No. 2 of 5

Rivian, known for its focus on electric trucks and SUVs, aligns perfectly with Tesla’s gaps in these segments. Tesla’s Cybertruck has faced delays and skepticism, making Rivian’s more traditionally designed R1T and R1S appealing alternatives that could be integrated into Tesla’s product lineup. Furthermore, Rivian’s robust approach to off-road capable EVs complements Tesla’s urban and performance-oriented vehicles, providing a broader appeal to a more diverse customer base.

Lucid Motors, on the other hand, brings a different set of strengths. Known for its luxury sedan, the Lucid Air, which boasts industry-leading battery efficiency and range, Lucid could elevate Tesla’s status in the premium sport performance segment. And from Auto Evolution’s drag race between the venerated Model S Plaid and the $249,000 1,249 horse power Lucid Sapphire:

There’s a new kid on the block, and it goes after the Model S Plaid with Lucid vengeance intentions. That’s right; the Lucid Sapphire is the new name to beat after it demolished the venerable Tesla champion as if the old apostle of electric motoring was running on solar power at midnight.

As of yet, Tesla has no answer for this pricing segment or straight-line performance.

However, it’s crucial to note that neither Rivian nor Lucid has demonstrated long-term profitability independently, a concern that haunts many new EV brands, reminiscent of Fisker’s impending financial collapse. By integrating Rivian and Lucid, Tesla could leverage their unique technologies and design philosophies to inspire exciting new models and innovations, potentially preventing a similar fate and ensuring a dynamic and profitable future in the rapidly evolving automotive landscape

The Rising Threat of BYD and the Global Competition

If you are unaware, Chinese automaker BYD has emerged as a formidable global adversary, briefly surpassing Tesla as the world’s top EV seller. Unlike Tesla, BYD has capitalized on massive domestic demand in China and aggressive pricing strategies without even tapping into the American market.

Graph No. 3 of 5

However, BYD is also not without its troubles. The company faces challenges overseas, with issues like quality control and internal discord stymieing its global aspirations. This presents a window of opportunity for Tesla, but only if it can innovate rapidly and expand domestically. Meanwhile, European automakers like BMW are not sitting idle. BMW’s EV sales have surged, bucking the trend of faltering demand that has plagued others, including Tesla. Consider this from Bloomberg:

BMW’s success is all the more impressive since it coincides with a broader slowdown in demand for EVs, particularly in Europe, where governments are reducing subsidies.

This surge is attributed to BMW’s extensive experience with battery technology and its early move to electrify its lineup. This not only underscores the intensifying competition in Europe but also highlights the necessity for Tesla to diversify and strengthen its own EV lineup.

Synergies and Scale

Tesla’s domestic market share has been stalling due to an aging model lineup and increased competition from new entrants and established automakers expanding into the EV space. A brand refresh, facilitated by launching new models or through potential acquisitions or mergers, could invigorate Tesla’s appeal and market position. Introducing diverse and innovative vehicles would attract a broader customer base, revitalize the brand and addressing concerns over innovation fatigue. This strategic expansion could resolve persistent concerns by signaling Tesla’s commitment to continuous evolution and leadership in the EV market.

The acquisitions of Rivian and Lucid would not only expand Tesla’s product portfolio but also bring significant operational synergies. Tesla could leverage Rivian’s manufacturing facilities and Lucid’s advanced battery technology to enhance its production capacities and battery efficiency. This would be crucial in maintaining Tesla’s edge in a market where technological superiority and production scale are increasingly important.

Graph No. 4 of 5

Furthermore, Tesla’s vast experience in software and autonomous driving technology could greatly enhance Rivian and Lucid vehicles, potentially increasing their value proposition and market penetration. Integrating these technologies could lead to the development of new, innovative features that would set their vehicles apart from competitors like BYD and the European brands.

Financial and Market Considerations

Global revenue for EVs is projected to reach a staggering $906 billion by 2028, illustrating a continued trajectory for the industry. For Tesla, maintaining its current leadership position will require not only sustaining its innovative edge but also succeeding in key markets such as North America and China. Achieving this is no small feat for any manufacturing company, particularly in a landscape crowded with aggressive competitors and rapidly evolving technologies.

To thrive, Tesla must transcend its current brand perception, which is tied to older models and past controversies. Here is Yahoo! Finance on the Q1 2024 Earnings:

In Q1, Tesla reported 386,810 global deliveries, well below estimates of 449,080, and produced 433,371 vehicles, also below estimates of 452,976.

The difference of around 46,500 vehicles produced versus sold led to concerns of demand waning globally for Tesla vehicles, which in turn has led to round after round of price cuts. On Monday, Tesla cut prices for vehicles in the US and China, leading to weakness in the stock during the day.

By refreshing its brand and product lineup, incorporating new models, and leveraging cutting-edge luxury technologies, Tesla can enhance its market appeal and meet the rising consumer demand more effectively. To capitalize on the growing market potential, it is imperative for Tesla to evolve into a more dynamic, innovative, and globally dominant brand. It is no longer these things.

Graph No. 5 of 5

With Tesla’s stock experiencing volatility and its leadership facing legal challenges, Elon Musk and the management team need to reassure investors that the $25,000 Model 2 will take ultimate priority and that brand marketing and advertising spend will be devoted to the product’s appeal. This is in best interest of the company’s long-term growth.

Marketing and Advertising 

As the EV market becomes more crowded and competitive, Tesla must look beyond the organic growth that it has long relied upon. While unlikely to give the idea much credence, Musk’s embattled $56 billion compensation package could and should be repurposed to acquire new design assets, technologies, and out right growth. This could potentially repay Musk several times over, over the long term. Acquiring Rivian and Lucid offers a pathway to enhanced product lines, advanced technology, and increased production capabilities, positioning Tesla to lead in the global EV arena against the likes of BYD and European manufacturers like BMW and Mercedes. These strategic moves could be crucial in securing Tesla’s market dominance for the next decade, aligning with its mission to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.

To sustain its market leadership and address pricing integrity challenges, Tesla will need to significantly reinvest in its brand marketing, advertising, media outreach, and influencer strategies. The recent layoffs, including the dissolution of Tesla’s newly formed “growth content” team, signal a retreat from a brief foray into traditional advertising initiatives approved by CEO Elon Musk. From Fortune on the matter:

The cuts signal a pullback from Tesla’s nascent advertising initiative. The automaker had long eschewed television, radio, print or online ads — and had built a formidable brand largely through word-of-mouth — before Musk said last year that Tesla would “try a little advertising and see how it goes.” [The recently laid off Alex] Ingram started building the growth team about four months ago.

As global EV sales growth decelerates and competition intensifies, Tesla cannot afford to rely solely on its past word-of-mouth or product-led marketing strategy. The company must adapt to the changing landscape by implementing a robust marketing strategy that leverages both digital and traditional media to reach broader audiences. This includes more effectively engaging with influencers (the Katie Perry effort was poor timing at best) and utilizing platforms like Meta, Instagram, and Snapchat more effectively, particularly in light of Musk’s hyper-dependence on X (which he owns).

****

Reinforcing Tesla’s brand through these channels may help mitigate downward market pressures and reinforce its pricing structure amidst growing competition. This strategy coupled with the speculation that he’d at least consider repurposing his compensation package as leverage to save Lucid and Rivian from similar turmoil (in their futures) would be entertaining at the very least. I am partial to this quote by Elon Musk in response to a SpaceX documentary filmmaker:

The most entertaining outcome is the most likely.

The “Tesla Bros” strategy would be entertaining, earned media generating, and potentially effective. If executed, it – along with the Model 2 strategy and proper marketing spend – could help return the car manufacturer and EV pioneer to the dominant future it once envisioned. If there is anyone out there who could succeed on all of these fronts – at once – it’s Elon Musk. History has proven that much.

Веб Смит 

Deep Dive: Dollar Stores and DTC Luxury

American-owned luxury retail marketplaces have failed while their Chinese competitors have thrived. American-owned dollar stores chains are experiencing their own struggles, closing 100s of stores across multiple retail chains and citing the lack of profitability as the culprit. One class of retailer discounted too often, the other could not discount enough. What gives?

The evolution of luxury eCommerce presents a tale of contrasting fortunes. While Western platforms struggle, China’s digital luxury market has seemingly bloomed, despite China’s economy faltering. This explores the impact of broader economic factors such as inflation, the role of discounting in American marketplaces, and the importance of a growing middle class.

Unraveling the Western Puzzle

The landscape of luxury eCommerce in the West has been marred by significant challenges. Platforms like Farfetch, MatchesFashion, and Yoox Net-a-Porter (YNAP) have grappled with a competitive market saturated with similar services, and diminishing consumer loyalty. The strategic missteps of these platforms, particularly their overreliance on discounting, have not only eroded profitability but also diluted brand value, alienating luxury consumers seeking exclusive and personalized experiences.

February 2024 saw Farfetch narrowly escape bankruptcy through a sale to South Korean giant Coupang in a pre-pack administration deal; by March, MatchesFashion had announced its shuttering. All the while, Richemont’s loss-making retailer YNAP continues to search for a buyer.

Meanwhile, in China, the largest global e-commerce platforms in terms of revenue — JD.com, Tmall, Taobao, and Luxury Pavilion — are thriving marketplaces for high-end brands. (JING Daily)

The issue of discounting, a tactic widely leveraged to attract consumers, has become a double-edged sword in the context of persisting inflation. As consumers face an increased cost of living, the allure of discounts can drive traffic but at the expense of the brand’s perceived value and margins. This dynamic has led luxury brands to reassess their reliance on multi-brand platforms, which often engage in aggressive promotional strategies to clear inventory.

China’s Thriving eCommerce Ecosystem

Contrasting starkly with the West’s eCommerce struggles, China’s luxury digital marketplace is thriving. Platforms such as JD.com and Tmall have harnessed DTC engagement, personalized services, and cutting-edge technology to create vibrant marketplaces that align with luxury consumers’ expectations. The success of these platforms can be attributed to their strategic focus on consumer engagement, brand autonomy, and the leveraging of data analytics to offer tailored shopping experiences.

Join The Membership

China’s model, characterized by its emphasis on direct brand interaction and personalized consumer journeys, has set a benchmark for the global luxury market. It demonstrates the potential for digital platforms to foster meaningful connections with consumers, thereby enhancing loyalty and driving growth.

The Broader Retail Context: Inflation and Discounting

The challenges facing Western luxury eCommerce platforms and the broader retail sector, including dollar stores, are symptomatic of a more extensive economic landscape marked by inflation. Inflationary pressures have led to increased operational costs for retailers and diminished disposable income for consumers, exacerbating the reliance on discounting as a strategy to stimulate sales. However, for luxury brands, this approach has often led to a devaluation of brand equity, as discounting undermines the exclusivity and desirability that define luxury goods.

Continue reading “Deep Dive: Dollar Stores and DTC Luxury” →