备忘录零售业的 2021

Year two of the pandemic, 2021 saw what can be best be described as sustained disruption throughout the world of retail. Wave after wave of pandemic variant and ensuing outbreak continued a chaos that we was supposed to be over in 2020. And yet, retail found ways to make its products easier to buy, more experiential to discover, and more available than projected (whether physically or digitally). We’re looking back at the main themes from this past year that will influence the year ahead.

The prolonged effects of Covid-19:

The pandemic is far from behind us. While we didn’t see mass lockdowns like 2020, the retail industry continued to form around new ways of shopping, new customer needs, and developing behaviors. The pandemic is woven throughout the rest of the year’s themes, with the Delta and Omicron variants making it clear that new disruption is never off the table. From a December memo on “Resilient Retail”:

The pandemic has caused a substantial shift in how consumers behave. It has begun to impact brand preferences, the decrease in impulse buying, a reduction in non-essential purchases, and a 35% increase on the reliance of online shopping.

Winners and losers have been born along the way. Major retailers proved most resilient, with the ability to skirt around supply chain back-ups (which we’ll get to in a moment) and get inventory on shelves ahead of the holidays. One example is Target, who found a way to keep digital shelves stocked in case their physical ones came up short.

The supply chain delays

Supply chain backups dominated retail headlines this year. As a result, major retailers responded with 2021’s holiday season starting earlier than before, with customers hoping to get ahead of out-of-stock notices. Agile, digitally native retailers were able to compete as well. But no one was immune. With COVID expected to continue disrupting the supply chain, impacting staffing and inventory availability, retailers will continue to develop omnichannel and staffing strategies that provide enough flexibility and control to outlast another year or two of these consumer behaviors. In October, we broke down the year in cascading effects caused by supply chain disruptions.

目前有 90 多艘船只漂离加利福尼亚州洛杉矶和长滩海岸。在全国范围内,卡车司机的就业率处于历史最低水平。在国际上,零售商对中国开始限制其众多工厂和航运设施的电力的消息表示担忧,这进一步阻碍了进口时间。一些最幸运的品牌正在购买必要的船只,以便在某种程度上可靠地将产品从 A 地运往 B 地。

But Lowe’s and many of the retailers in its class are no longer optimistic that any of the current issues will find resolution in the coming weeks. That may mean that we will see an uptick in top CPG brands as some of the top gifts of the season.

Even so, the holiday season saw retailers in a better position than many analysts believed. Some of them found new ways to consolidate supply chain management, other brands and retailers opted to buy their way out of supply chain disruption. Here is American Eagle Outfitters for example, the company also acquired Quiet Logistics:

The AEO pattern of acquisitions breaks a decades long cycle of reducing costs by off-shoring blue collar business functions. Historically, the market punished companies looking to build more robust, fully vertical systems. But no longer. If this two-year period has taught us anything, it’s that inventory control is a necessary function for brands. But also, that eCommerce operations are no longer on the fringes of big retail. The largest companies are building systems for direct-to-consumer growth.

eCommerce kept growing

Online retailers and their enablers, including Shopify, benefitted from the shift from in-store to eCommerce shopping that continued in 2021. What was reactionary in 2020 became more intentional this year and that’s expected to continue in 2022. From August:

So here we are, back again. Though government mandated shutdowns are far from likely, corporations are instituting their own versions of them. CBS News reported that Walmart and Kroger will require masks as the second wave of worry is anchored by the spread of the Delta variant. Whether more or less dangerous than the first model of pandemic, businesses have to respond proactively. Few industries are as preemptive as retail; other industries will follow.

This means longer lines, shorter in-store supply, and a decrease in consumer satisfaction as customers lament the persisting inconveniences of mainstream physical retail. Like before, eCommerce will be there to pick up the pieces. It will look something like a j-curve.

The rise of the Metaverse and Web3:

One of the biggest stories of the year is the rise of interest in the metaverse and Web3, both will continue to develop into next year. I mean, Oculus Quest 2 was the number one gift for Christams 2021 according to the free app rankings in the Apple app store. The shift from Web2 to Web3 finds internet users delving into digital-first and digital-only spaces, where their avatars and PFPs define their status. Consider it the new country club.

Brands are going to join in more in the new year, following a lead well established by Nike, which has led retail brands into metaverse presence development (MPD). MPD will define the next generation of marketing and brand equity; these are the companies leading in the digital world. For Nike, it’s been a worthwhile play so far.

This trend will continue. In one prediction from this year, we explored the shift from eCommerce to simply “commerce,” which will account for any purchases made in any space – physical, online or digital. When goods can be bought digitally and their inherent value is also digital, that means new competition in retail that overrides physical demands and disruptions. Just look at what’s happening to the supply chain – it’s all connected.

DTC’s new store strategy

It was a big year for first-generation DTC brands. Of the many that went public was Warby Parker, whose growth strategy belies a more significant trend that will define the paths for other mature DTC brands going forward. Warby Parker is going to continue opening more stores, along with other brands including Allbirds, which also went public this year. In August:

No, DTC was never meant to be online only. Warby realized over the years that its customers wanted to shop for glasses in stores, and it built the infrastructure to meet them. Now, the question is whether they can leverage their growing consumer-base to achieve operating leverage. And can Warby Parker continue climbing the chart?

Expect more similar brands to expand their store networks in populated areas where they can boost their online business simultaneously.

And last, the acquisition boom

It was an even bigger year for exits. Companies including Manscaped, BuzzFeed, Milk Makeup and more went public with the help of special purpose acquisition companies. In March, retail vet Art Peck launched a $200 million SPAC to acquire emerging retail brands. Good Commerce Acquisition Corporation will focus on e-commerce and data-led companies that also have ties to wholesale and retail. What became clear this year is that retail is not a funding race, it’s an EBITDA one. From October:

Over the past few years, several categories have benefited from the tailwinds of the shift towards online retail. Suddenly, SPACs were interested in direct-to-consumer retailers. Private acquisitions became a popular headline. Companies like Figs, Warby Parker and Brilliant Earth debuted on the public markets; each share market capitalizations north of $1 billion. Warby Parker and Figs, both north of $5.3 billion in market cap, are setting the market for the brands suspected to follow: Allbirds and Away are but a few in the pipeline. Now, companies like Gymshark are mulling an IPO, signaling a final stage of sorts.

All of these themes will influence the next year and beyond for retail. Covid is still here, the supply chain ripple effects will be long lasting, and the metaverse will become more mainstream. What’s been proven at the same time is that retail is resilient, and DTC is a viable model with its biggest practitioners moving to the next stage. It makes sense – it’s a long game. We’re still in the thick of it.

By Web Smith and Hilary Milnes | Art by Alex Remy and Christina Williams 

会员简报:量化 DTC 市场

sGnT_5iE

历史以一种有趣的方式影响着未来。只要有足够的历史背景和数据,观察者就能预测结果。但是,对于产品制造商和零售商来说,预测结果的能力等同于成败。King C. Gillette 曾写道

本会员简报专为以下人士设计 执行委员为了方便加入,您可以点击下面的链接,获取数百份报告、我们的 DTC 权力清单和其他工具,帮助您做出高水平的决策。

在此加入

第 329 期:DTC 的传销化

关于 Mavely 和 DTC 行业未来不言而喻的机遇。据报道,Greats Brand 最近一年的盈利为 1,300 万美元,但随后就被 Steve Madden 收购,这让许多业内人士感到震惊。收入似乎低于许多人的预期,但这也符合建立一个全渠道品牌的现实情况,因为获取客户的成本往往很高。盈利能力很可能是个问题。这就引出了一个问题:如果 Greats 的客户获取模式是建立在盈利和价值基础上的,情况会有什么不同?依赖风险投资的高增长模式可能会提升生态系统中少数几个品牌的地位,但似乎正在压制大多数品牌的退出选择。

广告支出百分比是调整激励机制的一个很好的工具。问题不在于经过测试和审查的广告公司。问题出在那些不良的广告公司身上,它们利用这一工具在提供价值之前就垫高收入。

马尔科-马兰迪斯

Greats 由 Ryan Babenzien 创立,被认为是一家备受推崇的独立制鞋公司,很有希望成为像 Allbirds 一样有前途的品牌。Babenzien 的营销团队掌握着几种推广方式。Greats 采用了多种方法,包括绩效营销、直邮、战略合作,甚至是基于短信的推广。但最终,该品牌从未实现盈利。这是一个严酷的提醒,我们可能正在转向 DTC 领域;赚取利润的重要性似乎更加突出了。这是对许多科技公司为实现价值增长而采用的 SaaS 多种模式的斥责。在增长盈利的交汇点上,DTC 品牌应该沿着名为 "盈利 "的道路前进。

Greats 的大部分鞋类产品仍通过其电子商务网站销售,去年在克罗斯比街开设了一家 500 平方英尺的分店。该品牌还与诺德斯特龙(Nordstrom)建立了批发合作关系,并与男装时尚权威尼克-伍斯特(Nick Wooster)展开了热闹的合作[1]。

该公司似乎做对了一切,但据报道,Greats的售价不超过上一年收入(2018年6月30日-2019年6月30日)的两倍。Greats 筹集了 1300 万美元的资金,据说以大约 2600 万美元的价格出售。显而易见的是,盈利之路的缺失成为了导致楔子出现的问题。史蒂夫-麦登的供应链和组织将非常适合这个原因,该公司上一年的营业额达到了 4.1 亿美元。而且,他们在保持盈利的同时还做到了这一点。

我们希望建立一个可盈利的企业,我们是少数几个没有筹集到巨额资金的数字原生品牌之一,这使得建立一个可盈利的企业并在退出时实现双赢具有挑战性。我们并不是要打造第一轮估值最高的公司。我们要做的是在最后拥有最大估值的公司。[2]

这次收购的消息给直接面向消费者领域的许多人敲响了警钟。还能做些什么来提高直接面向消费者品牌的生存能力?早期阶段的盈利之路就那么重要吗?如果有一点是明确的,那就是 "不惜一切代价 "优化增长的时代可能已经过去了。随着顾客获取成本的不断飙升,零售媒体开始报道一些营销替代方案。其中,Mavely 是一个相对较新的平台,它推出了一种独特的方法来降低这些品牌的 CAC。Mavely 的主要理念是:把这些 DTC 品牌变成多层次营销公司。

Mavely 试图对多层次营销模式进行新的诠释,在这种模式下,公司招募人员为其销售产品,但这种模式因导致许多人实际亏损而饱受诟病。Wray 说,Mavely 没有加入费用,没有消费者必须维持的库存要求,也没有用户推荐产品所需的最低粉丝数要求。[3]

这家总部位于芝加哥的公司由埃文-雷(Evan Wray)、佩吉-奥弗莱厄蒂(Peggy O'Flaherty)和肖恩-奥布莱恩(Sean O'Brien)创立,目前已筹集到 100 万美元,据说 "按用户计算 "已实现盈利。这项基于应用程序的服务拥有 10,000 名用户,目前以美化的点对点联盟模式运营。不过,虽然它最终可能对品牌的有机增长和付费增长起到重要的补充作用,但这一时间可能比 Mavely 愿意承认的要长。这类服务的临界质量意味着 Mavely 必须赢得数千万用户。观察韦伊的公司是否能像他们对 DTC 合作伙伴所宣扬的那样,继续致力于发展:成本效益高、发展速度稍慢、一次只发展一个客户(下线),这将是一件有趣的事情。与此同时,绩效营销行业可能也将迎来一次自身的进化。

推特上的网络史密斯

我不确定很多 DTC 品牌所有者是否意识到,他们正在建立的公司的估值是收入的 1 - 1.5 倍。

在最近一次关于将广告支出百分比作为媒体购买代理利润中心的对话中,代理公司所有人大卫-赫尔曼(David Hermann)就 DTC 品牌与代理合作伙伴之间应如何开展业务发表了自己的看法。

这就是为什么我们将收入百分比与 ROAS 挂钩,而 ROAS 是基于他们的利润率,以及在扣除与我们的费用和开支相关的成本后的收支平衡点。信任是关键,我们会在开始之前把所有事情都说清楚,这样他们就不会被蒙在鼓里。[4]

这提出了一个有价值的问题。随着机构投资者不断向 DTC 领域投入越来越多的风险资本,营销方法也应随之发展。由于大量资本涌入绩效营销,CAC 也随之上升。这种循环导致了一个意想不到的结果:企业规模变大,但基本上无利可图。也许投资者和创始人都应该重新考虑成败的数学问题。赫尔曼的建议是正确的,代理商应该考虑一种新的报酬模式--一种强调为这些零售商带来健康贡献利润的模式。

赫尔曼继续说道:

[我的公司现在正在处理一个客户的利润率问题。[我们]正在帮助他们寻找更好的供应链。他们需要 2.15 倍的利润率才能在扣除费用和开支后实现收支平衡,所以我现在正在帮助他们解决利润率方面的问题。正如我常说的,媒体购买只是工作的一部分。

新型的绩效营销代理公司大有可为。具备品牌方面实用专业知识的代理公司可以围绕健康的利润率制定收购战略,为将利润百分比作为 DTC 品牌与其代理合作伙伴共享的关键绩效指标铺平道路。这解决了几个问题。在这些问题中,这种模式考虑到了(1) 可持续性;(2) 实现盈利的有效途径;(3) 代理公司与品牌之间的长期关系;(4) 减少对机构资本的依赖。代理公司应考虑根据其为品牌赚取的利润进行补偿,而不是根据媒体购买者的花费进行补偿。

像 Mavely、BrandBox、DTX 公司的Unbox 和 Showfields 这样的收购工具可能会影响代理业务模式的转变,为 CAC 的多样化提供有意义的机会。如果是这样,DTC 时代可能最终会开始解决其盈利问题。这可能是改善估值倍数和退出选择性的第一步,而这个行业正需要另一根羽毛。

报告人:Web Smith |大约 2PM