Sample Report: The Private Label Puzzle

Executive Summary

In the 19th century, merchants in the mail-order and wholesale business introduced their own private-label products. The goal was to provide valuable and cheaper alternatives to premium-priced national brands, who significantly marked up their products. In the Mad Men era of the 1950s, national brands built their empires by investing in packaging design, branding, and marketing, which caused the status of private labels to fall. The monotone messaging and aesthetics of private labels didn’t help, nor did their plain names like “Organic Ketchup” or “Great Value.”

When these products sat next to their branded counterparts that featured more creative packaging and had worked for years to get into the hearts of consumers, the picture became even bleaker. Private labels often grow when the economy is struggling, and recede when it is performing. Accordingly, they began to grow again in the late 80’s and 90’s as the recession of the early 90’s took the United States by storm. The category’s growth then halted in the late 1990s as private label products felt severe price pressure and companies lowered prices to compete, which reduced quality. This tarnished private labels’ image even further and reduced sales.

Over the past few years, however, private labels have improved their standing. They are growing at faster rates than name brands—a 4.6% increase from 2015 to 2016 vs. 1.1% increase for national brands. Retailers are infusing private labels with an identity and creating experiences around them, while new players such as Amazon and Buzzfeed are reinventing what private label means today. As a result, the definition of private label is shifting and the lines that divided private label and name brands in the past are increasingly blurry.

This piece looks at:

  • What’s happening with private labels and why does it matter for the larger consumer ecosystem?
  • What does the rise of private labels mean for you and how should you leverage it?
  • What should brands, investors, and real estate developers do to harness the evolution of private labels?

Takeaway

  • Private labels abruptly stopped growing in the early 2000’s after an ascent in the 80’s and 90’s. However, they’ve recently seen a resurgence in popularity as consumers look to fresh options and companies add more complexity and value to these products.
  • Start-ups are increasingly creating products “without the middleman,” successfully marketing some of the benefits of private labels without surrounding themselves with other third-party brands. This approach means creating products with cheaper prices, simpler aesthetics, and fresh ideas.
  • Retailers—and increasingly platforms—are using private label products to increase their revenue streams while giving shoppers more choices and a better shopping experience.

Case Studies

Amazon, Brandless, Buzzfeed, Costco, MeUndies, MoveButter, Sephora, Target, Tide

The Market: What’s happening and why does it matter?

The traditional brand landscape

There are three main players in the brand ecosystem that are worth understanding to determine where private labels are headed: name brands, traditional private labels, and startup private labels.

Name Brands

Name brands—products made by a well-known maker or manufacturer with a consumer-facing identity—are still extremely valuable for the economy: 83% of the products that retailers sell are branded. Their reputation and history provides the consistent quality shoppers need to make a purchasing decision. For example, Tide continues to be the most popular and trusted laundry detergent in the United States. Consumers know what Tide stands for and what its values are, which makes it an easier choice than less-known competitors. This transparency makes it easier for people to understand the messaging and intent behind the brand, unlike murkier private-label competitors whose value and quality is unclear.

Traditional Private Labels

Traditional private labels are products that are packaged or manufactured for sale under the name of a multi-brand retailer. Retailers are increasingly using them as a revenue driver by increasing their sophistication, introducing new and better products into their assortments. Costco rakes in 25% of its revenue from private labels as its Kirkland brand has created a separate identity from the Costco brand. This allows shoppers to frame it as a great brand that they can only find at Costco.

Sephora disrupted the cosmetics industry by changing the way women shopped for beauty in 1998, encouraging them to go from beauty counters at department stores to a more self-service, in-store experience. Women embraced this format—they could now try on multiple brands of makeup at the same time without having to rely on a gatekeeper at the counter. Sephora’s expertise and brand appeal allowed it to create its high-quality Sephora Originals lines along with its namesake private labels. Its latest release is Marc Jacobs Beauty, a line of prestige makeup products with a robust marketing campaign that Sephora helped architect. Its knowledge of makeup combined with its experience selling new and traditional lines to women all over the world has given the retailer the knowhow to successfully launch and sell these new lines at scale.

Other retailers that have created sought-after private labels with sophisticated marketing campaigns or trending products. Macy’s does it with its Material Girl brand and Whole Foods has its 365 private-label brand. The latter has created immense brand value for Whole Foods and gives shoppers a reason to come into the store. Amazon, after its recent acquisition of Whole Foods, is putting a significant emphasis on 365.

Start-up private labels

While name brands and private labels have existed for a long time, startups are entering the space with two distinct approaches: 1) They are choosing to only sell private labels, rather than selling both private labels and name brands; and 2) They are elevating traditional commodities to a new level that is typically reserved for name-brand products.

Private label only

While most private labels were sold alongside other name brands, new startups are unbundling these prior arrangements to only sell private labels. This concept was popularized offline with companies such as Trader Joe’s. As it moves online, companies like Movebutter, for example, have similar strategies. Movebutter is a new private label start-up that calls itself the “supermarket of the future,” which proclaims “When you shop with Movebutter, you pay for good food, not a Super Bowl ad and an expensive physical store.” The design of its products, the simplicity of its site, and the information its gives shoppers—which includes how consumers are saving money and where the company sources its food—promotes this mantra. Similarly, the new company Brandless heralds itself as a high-quality supermarket that sells each item for just $3 and calls itself BrandTax free. Both of these brands only sell their own products.

Infusing commodities with value

At the same time, other brands like Away, MeUndies, and Casper are building brands in product categories that were traditionally fragmented and commodity-driven. Many start-ups use the reduction in overhead and marketing costs that is typically afforded to private label as marketing fodder for a brand that “cuts out the middleman,” a phrase typically reserved for private-label products. These brands are showing how the private label business model and aesthetics have regained their cool and are considered a big growth opportunity. Happy Socks and MeUndies are trying to de-commoditize socks and underwear respectively, coming out with proclaimed-as-superior product experiences, which feature soft fabrics and big brand personalities that bring in a discerning mass-market consumer.

MeUndies sells its products creatively by featuring themed bundles and boxes as well as a monthly underwear subscription service for a discount. According to the CEO of MeUndies, Bryan Lalezarian, younger consumers don’t buy new underwear very often. Its subscription option creates a fun experience for an otherwise monotone chore by sending a new pair of themed underwear every month that helps it on its quest of creating a new behavior among millennials. Other than this, its relentless focus on the product ups its brand equity—consumers rightly feel that the specialized brand creates a superior product.

MeUndies is also starting to create partnerships for its capsule collections. It recently partnered with restaurateur Eddie Huang to create a new design called “Pandamonium,” which was used alongside his image for billboards and other ads. This and other initiatives is working to infuse the brand with more of an identity and personality, creating affinity and loyalty. With 56% of shoppers saying they typically buy their preferred brand regardless of price, MeUndies and its contemporaries are betting that people still hold name brands near and dear to their hearts.

From mass-market to niche private labels

As startups continue raiding the space, bigger companies are responding by creating private labels for more than the mass-market shopper. Instead, they are using private labels to reach different niches who demand a more personalized and exciting shopping experience yet are still price conscious.

Target focuses on simple products and private label

Target is seeing promising results with some of its private brands such as Cat & Jack, a new children’s brand that had over $1 billion dollars in first-year sales. It focuses on products that feature bright colors, whimsical graphics, and clever slogans on large in-store displays.

Even with these big successes, it has revamped its entire private label strategy and is now creating private label brands for specific niches. Driven by its newly created Design Lab, the retailer plans to launch more than a dozen new private labels between 2017 and 2018. The goal is to fight back against its stagnating apparel sales. Each of Target’s private-label brands focuses on a particular niche it wants to attract. “A New Day” intends to bring in women who are interested in discovering new clothes every month and commands an audience similar to that of Zara. The hope is to create energy, excitement and newness around the retailer.

Platforms expand into private label

Amazon

While private labels and name brands are the two oldest players in the brand landscape, the internet has created a new entrant: the platform-driven private label. With years of experience in the ecommerce space, Amazon has started creating and selling all types of private-label brands on its site. It currently has 29 different private labels. The company has already seen success with AmazonBasics, which competes with its vendors for sales of products like simple home goods, computer accessories, pet supplies, and more. With all of the data and user experience control that Amazon has on its site, its brands are doing well, outselling its competitors in multiple categories. Notably, AmazonBasics has taken one-third of online battery sales and baby wipes from its Amazon Elements line account for 16% of the market share, just behind name-brand items Huggies and Pampers.

Amazon is starting to expand into even more categories like lingerie, cosmetics, women’s apparel and furniture. It has created dozens of niche brands such as The Fix, Ella Moon, Paris Sunday, Arabella, and more. It sells these items alongside name-brand items without indicating that they are Amazon brands. Customers who are looking for fashion items and don’t necessarily prefer specific brand names can opt to purchase these products based on price and style alone. With an unprecedented amount of data on its sites, it has the ability to create products based on holes in the market and to play on trends that are performing well on the site. Over time, Amazon’s private label brands stand to improve as the company tests out different products and continues to optimize them.

BuzzFeed

Media companies are also starting to create private labels themselves. Buzzfeed attracts 2.3 billion video views a month and has turned the overhead food video into a phenomenon. The company is now leveraging its intellectual property to create private label products in a similar way to what companies like Disney and Universal Studios have done in the past. Buzzfeed has a commerce division called Buzzfeed Product Labs whose sole purpose is to create products that align with the Buzzfeed brand, which is shareable, quirky and far-reaching, among other things.

Product Labs started off by creating Homesick candles (candles that remind people of their home state), the Fondoodler (a cheese gun), a customizable cookbook, and—in summer 2017—the Tasty One Top, a smart appliance meant to help customers seamlessly cook meals in connection with the Tasty app. The popularity of Buzzfeed’s main brand is helping these products succeed and find an audience. With Buzzfeed articles and videos getting billions of views every month, adding the Buzzfeed philosophy and name to its own products has the potential to be very lucrative.

What does the rise of private labels mean for you and how should you leverage it?

Core, Plus and Premier Members have access to the Action & Opportunities section of each report, which outlines additional frameworks and questions to act on. Learn more about an upgraded membership.

Companies

Building brand equity

Private label brand equity is rising as these products are no longer considered stale alternatives to national brands. They are becoming powerhouses, featuring sophisticated marketing tactics, added value, premium lines, partnerships, and whole start-ups around them.

  • How can you freshen up any commodity or stale items you sell by building sought after brands around them? How can you infuse these products with value to make them more appealing to your customers?
  • How can improving or rethinking private labels help you drive the right type of growth? What competitive whitespace can these private labels fill where customers are looking for extra value and want a brand they can trust?
  • Can you partner with other brands to increase the brand equity of the commodities or other traditional items you sell? For each product category, what qualities make brands successful and can you offer some of these as a private label?
  • How can you improve the aesthetics of your private label products? Does it make sense to create premium private labels to fill holes or take advantage of a trend? What if you treated them like named-brand? What would change?

Leveraging intellectual property

Media companies’ Intellectual property is increasingly a valuable foundation and marketing channel for for private labels with context and value around them.

  • What intellectual property, customers, or data can you leverage to ideate new private label products and increase the chances that your private labels find an eager audience? How could your content strategies support these efforts?
  • If you are a private label manufacturer, how can you partner with media companies and create programs that help them create brands around them? How can you give these companies the infrastructure they need to thrive?
  • With YouTube stars and channels redefining media, how can private label companies take advantage of the high-demand for their merch without the manufacturing burden it normally requires? Who could you partner with to assume this responsibility?

Evolving product assortments

Private labels are evolving as competitive retailers recreate their assortments for better private labels and startups create private label hybrids that take commodity products and infuse them with value.

  • What is the optimal mix of private label vs. name brands for your company? What is the target percentage of private label products to name brands that you should sell?
  • How can you use a mix of exclusives, private labels, and start-up brands to differentiate yourself from the competition?

Investors

Figuring out what you’re investing in

Potential investment and portfolio companies need to specifically understand where they fall between private labels, national brands, or a private-label startup hybrids that aim to get rid of the middleman.

  • Are companies that claim to take the middleman out of a specific product actually innovating or is there a better way they can create value? Is this approach structurally defensible or is it just marketing?
  • How can the brands you’re investing in leverage private labels’ growth through either creating new branded commodities or using simpler messaging that transparently shows the consumer the value the brand is providing?
  • How will these products be branded and messaged to communicate value but also affordability? In a world with endless choice, how will they stand out?

Using private label to fill market holes

Private label isn’t sleepy like it used to be. These products are growing faster than national brands and filling in holes by becoming premium private labels, value private labels, or private labels that focus on natural or organic products.

  • Where is there an opportunity to create a more premium or high value version of an everyday good? Why does this whole exist?
  • Are there any trends in the consumer landscape that larger brands are passing over for one reason or the other? Which startups can you invest in that are plugging in these holes?

Leveraging loyal audiences

There are opportunities for private labels everywhere as platform companies, media industries, and artists are creating products people crave.

  • How can the companies you are looking at leverage their loyal audiences or communities they have to create an innovative private-label product that already has a built-in audience? This could be a tech company getting into ecommerce or a product company getting into media.
  • How should you evaluate companies that are facilitating the creation of private label products for media companies, celebrities, and other pop-culture phenomena? Will more of this infrastructure need to exist as influence grows and centralizes?
  • How much does scale and reach matter today? Are these existing attributes to build businesses around or can they be built from scratch?

Real Estate Investors

Driving foot traffic in the new economy

People are no longer drawn to retail just because they carry well-known national brands but are also looking for fresh ideas, innovative experiences, and cool products they can get from unbranded private labels and startups.

  • How can you better evaluate e-commerce first companies when they don’t sell well-known national brands? Do they have something else to offer like an innovative product, a loyal fan base, or a smart business model?
  • How can you increase your immediate foot traffic and long-term growth by bringing in more sought-after private label and private label hybrid companies into your mall? What brands help make your real estate a destination?
  • How can you create more unbranded experiences in your malls that will bring consumers back for more? Who can you partner with to create these experiences and possibly sell private-label products in tandem? How could your brand benefit from this setup?

Marketing private label stores

Private label stores have different needs compared to well-known national brands. In order to serve and evaluate these companies you should provide them with personalized resources and use a different playbook to broker deals with them.

  • How can you create marketing campaigns that feature the private labels and e-commerce first companies you carry? How can you use this to make a splash and bring new, diverse people to shop at your stores?
  • Private labels and start-ups like to tell stories and show off their products to lure in shoppers, which may be different from national brands, which rely on their recognizable brand names. How can you facilitate these different needs with your store sizes, display windows, and other architectural features and brand deals?
  • How should you change your optimum store assortment? Are there any old restrictive deals you have with brands that you can change now that the consumer tide is changing?

Going Forward

Purchasing private label products is no longer correlated with economic hardship. Young shoppers are looking for products that provide added value and feature fresh concepts, while also being price competitive. If private labels provide these fresh ideas, increased variety, and premium experiences, they’ll capture attention and have a chance to thrive in the new consumer economy. Additionally, newer platform companies like Buzzfeed and Amazon can go the way of Disney and start utilizing their intellectual property, data, and customers to create a market for products that they know people want.

With private labels growing at faster rates than name brands and retailers putting additional focus on them, it’s clear that private labels will only grow in importance over the coming years. This will continue threatening the market share of national brands and create a new and higher standard for private labels. At the same time, the distinction between branded and unbranded products is only getting greyer.


Excerpt: Fast or Frivolous? How building consumer brands is evolving, accelerating, and evaporating.

Executive Summary

For hundreds of years, the playbook for building consumer product companies has incrementally improved. There have been marginal advances, but the fundamental premise of selling goods locally never wavered.

Then the internet happened, promising to fundamentally reshape the brand-building playbook. Today, there are more brands vying for the spotlight than ever before.

But will the new playbook—and the brands that use it—be as big, successful and long lasting as those that came before it? This report seeks to answer this question by looking into 13 different case studies of brands that started during the 20th and 21st centuries.

We created three different cohorts of brands for this study: Heritage Brands, Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands and Digitally-Native Phase 2 Brands.

The Heritage Brands we studied, which include Comme De Garçons, Nike, Patagonia, Ralph Lauren, and Victoria’s Secret, all existed before the internet. They were mainly product and marketing companies that focused on designing and manufacturing reputable products, which they would then market and distribute through wholesale or in their own retail stores. Heritage Brands still hold the largest amount of market share, with a combined revenue of $45.5 billion, and live in the hearts and minds of consumers. Longevity is difficult to come by — almost 80% of companies traded on the U.S. stock market from 1960-2009 were gone by 2009. The average Heritage Brand we studied has been in business for 47 years. These early days and milestones provide crucial insights as to why these brands are still in business today.

The Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands we studied, which include, Bonobos, The Honest Company, Happy Socks, Nasty Gal, and Warby Parker, all started between 2008-2012 and were a product of the internet era. We will refer to them as Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands. These brands mainly took existing products and ported them over to the internet. They started building the skillsets needed to thrive online and used a digital-first mindset to evolve the core shopping experience. Phase 1 Brands brands have revenues in the low hundreds of millions of dollars, but because of their often sky-high valuations, their viability as either independent companies or potential acquisition targets is still unclear.

The newest brands we studied, which include Allbirds, Casper, and Away, were all founded after 2012 and also started online. However, shopping habits and social media have changed the ecosystem since Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands launched. Digitally-Native Phase 2 Brands, as we’ll call them, are increasingly focused on building communities around their products and creating lifestyle brands from the beginning. These brands are growing faster, raising more money, and opening more stores than their Phase 1 and Heritage Brand counterparts. They are also performing better than the Heritage Brands did in their early days. Even so the future of Phase 2 Brands as long-lasting companies is still up in the air.

What follows is a detailed analysis of Heritage Brands and Digitally-Native Brands across six different vectors:

  1. How did the brands fund themselves in the early days?
  2. How long did it take for the brands to open their first stores and how many stores did they have after ten years?
  3. How many years did it take the brands to reach $10 million in revenue?
  4. How long did it take the brands to become profitable?
  5. How long did it take the brands to reach $100 million in sales?
  6. How long did it take the brands to run into their first financial crisis?

The best way to understand the new brand building playbook is to look at how it has changed since the old one was written. Only then can one determine the longevity of brands in the new era.

Methodology

All data in this report comes from publicly reported information, books, and data sources such as Pitchbook. We calculated averages or estimated when numbers from multiple sources differed. Because some of the brands we studied are private companies, we confirmed information to the best of our abilities, which included reaching out to each company individually. Most refused to comment, although we gave each of them an opportunity to.

All of the revenue, profit and acquisition amounts shown below for Heritage Brands and Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands are adjusted for inflation at 2016 rates.

How did the brands fund themselves in their first ten years?

Core Members get access to all of the content outside of the boxes. Plus and Premier Members get access to the full report, which includes everything in the boxes. 

Building consumer goods is a capital-intensive business. It takes time and money to develop products, a process which happens long before the first sale. When Heritage Brands were starting out in the 1960s and early 1970s, institutional capital was not nearly as sizeable or available as it is today. These brands had to rely on different and more limited sources of income to bootstrap their companies and prove their worth.

Today, Digitally-Native brands have specific avenues to secure early capital and start building. Low bond yields in the current decade have led investors to flood the equity markets with money, giving venture capitalists more capital to invest than they know what to do with. Investors hope this influx of cash will help companies expand rapidly and dominate for years to come. The difference between the amount of money raised for Heritage Brands and the amount of money raised for modern brands during the first ten years is staggering, with Heritage Brands raising hundreds of thousands in their first few years and Digitally-Native Phase 1 and 2 Brands raising tens of millions.

Heritage Brands

When Heritage Brands were making their names, there was not much potential to quickly scale a brand and capital was much more constrained. Instead, Heritage Brands had to rely on more limited sources of money like savings, bank loans, family money, and operating cash flow in order to start and grow their companies. The type of investment needed to quickly scale a good idea was counterintuitive to banks, who wanted to back riskless ventures and give loans to small businesses that would become profitable right away and consistently pay them back.

Brands didn’t have much money to spend in order to continue fueling growth. They had to be profitable and quickly prove they were building a viable business. Early on, few brands spent as heavily on marketing as many Digitally-Native brands do today making the growth history of Heritage Brands slower and more methodical.

Victoria’s Secret

Victoria’s Secret did not have access to large sums of money when it first started. The idea for the company came about when founder Roy Raymond had to deal with purchasing lingerie for his wife in an old-fashioned department store filled with prying eyes and boring options. He saw a white space in the market and came up with the idea of selling sexier lingerie to the mass consumer in its own separate storefront, which would provide a more exciting and comfortable experience. Previously, shoppers mostly visited high-end stores like Frederick’s of Hollywood for special occasions like wedding nights. However, Raymond believed that the lingerie market could be larger if it were more accessible and thought up the idea for Victoria’s Secret.

In 1977 — the year the company was founded — he and his wife used their savings, money from friends, and a bank loan to get the idea off the ground. With this $322,000, they leased a storefront inside a mall in Palo Alto, California and created a store in the style of a Victorian boudoir. The company made approximately $2 million in its first year and continued to moderately grow, making around $15 million five years later in 1982. At that point, it had four storefronts and a growing catalog business, which helped spur sales. Before the internet existed, catalogs were the primary tool for reaching a national audience without needing to continually open stores.

Through its self-funding, Victoria’s Secret soon caught the attention of executives at holding company The Limited, who had never seen anything like it before. The holding company felt it could make the brand a household name and offered to buy it. Since Raymond was already having growing pains and was in search of additional resources, he decided to sell the brand to The Limited in 1982 for around $2.5 million. (The fact that he sold the business for 16% of revenue is emblematic of the times.) The Limited then poured capital into the store, growing it into the mega-brand it is today.

Ralph Lauren

Ralph Lauren was working as a men’s clothing salesman during the 1960s when he convinced Beau Brummel, a manufacturer, to produce his own line. He started off selling his products at specialty stores and, soon after, at Bloomingdale’s. After testing out the concept, he decided to create his own company with a $366,000 loan from his brother and the clothing manufacturer Norman Hilton. He used this money to design, manufacture, and distribute his new menswear collection, which he sold primarily out of Bloomingdale’s.

Ralph Lauren secured funding, partners and materials through his retail industry connections. Using Bloomingdale’s as a strategic partner and Beau Brummel as a manufacturing partner gave him an initial audience, in addition to expertise and capital. All of this put Ralph Lauren in a good position to sell profitably and grow sustainably in its early days. His unique aesthetic quickly got the attention of the fashion community as his clothes invoked a sense of upper-class American style that was highly regarded. He used this same approach to create a women’s line and other adjacent labels.

Digitally-Native Phase 1 Brands

The brands we studied that were founded between 2008-2012 almost exclusively went for professional and institutional money to launch and grow. They rarely used their own savings or took on debt. Instead, they billed themselves as tech companies — first-movers and fast-growers — in order to grab venture money early on, using terms like “direct to consumer” to play into the investor appetite for “disruption” at every turn. Many of these brands sought to redefine industries they felt were stale, much like Victoria’s Secret did for lingerie in the 1980s. Starting as digital-first companies and wielding the web as a crucial tool was attractive to investors looking to capitalize on the internet revolution.

Nasty Gal

Nasty Gal was founded in 2006 as an eBay store and grew quickly into a coveted brand among young girls in California. Early on, the brand made money by finding clothes from Salvation Army stores and then selling them online for a profit. This worked well since its founder, Sophia Amoruso, had a knack for branding products in a way that drew attention. She would style the clothes, take pictures, add captions and then post the products online to sell to the general public.

In 2008, Nasty Gal had around $215,000 in revenue, growing to $28 million only three years later in 2011. It raised $9 million in venture money in March of 2012, $40 million in August 2012, and then $16 million in February 2015. These consecutive infusions of capital forced a nicely growing business to hyper-scale since investors needed a big return in their expected fund lifecycle of seven to ten years. This transformed the company from one focused on profitability to one focused on rapid growth at all costs. This would prove ineffective and lead the company into turbulent waters, which is further discussed in the Financial Crisis section of this report.

Digitally-Native Phase 2

Brands founded after 2012 view themselves as companies that can scale even more quickly than their Phase 1 counterparts. They raised more capital more quickly to realize this supposed advantage.

Casper

Casper raised money right in the middle of the Digitally-Native boom, calling itself the Warby Parker of mattresses by delivering a superior product at a cheaper price. It raised institutional capital from the beginning, starting with $1.6 million in January 2014 and then another $15 million a few months later. Its valuation ballooned from $7 million to $59 million and its revenue reached $30 million by the end of the year. This money,strategic prowess and never-ending subway advertising resulted in the company becoming the top-of-mind choice in the easy-delivery mattress space, even though similar competitors already existed in the marketplace.

Away

The founders of Away also came of age right in the middle of the Digitally-Native boom. Steph Korey and Jen Rubio worked at Warby Parker in 2011 and helped the company grow from 20 to 300 employees. They felt that the future of retail was direct to consumer, so they looked for another category in which to cut out the middleman.

With their hope of growing fast and disrupting the travel industry, venture money was a no-brainer. This additional capital would help them leapfrog into a bigger business with the potential of owning a piece of the overall market. Away raised $2.5 million at a $7.2 million valuation in 2015 before it sold any product. It followed with $8.5 million at a $40 million valuation one year later and then $20 million at a $120 million valuation in 2017, with $28 million of revenue.

The founders have admitted that they raised more money than they were looking for, evidence that there is an abundance of capital available to brands in the current landscape.

Questions:

  • How do phased funding rounds change the strategy of the company? What are the risks associated with raising excess capital for growth in early stages? What are the necessary steps that an early brand should focus on to build brand awareness and sales?
  • What would it take for young brand founders today to build up the business acumen to create billion-dollar businesses from scratch with less invested capital? What affect would this have on the brand, the founders’ equity and the employees stock options?
  • What does a high valuation predict in terms of long-term investment potential? Can investors expect returns based on valuation? If not, what are the leading metrics for financial return?
  • Are Digitally-Native Brands spending more money than they need to by selling only direct to consumer and ignoring wholesale? Is it possible to acquire customers sustainably without wholesale?
  • Is the idea of cutting out the middleman overplayed or is it actually something that can help grow these businesses into successful competitors?

Learn more about Loose Threads Membership

Loose Threads Members get access to forward-thinking research, events and our analysts—so you can grow the right way.


The Niche Audience Report

The Niche Audience Report

Executive Summary

Even the most seemingly revolutionary products can fail without an engaged audience. According to Harvard Business Review, American families repeatedly buy the same 150 items for their household needs. Getting shoppers to consider a new product is difficult. Even well-known names like Apple, Nike and Lululemon have trouble introducing new products into the marketplace.

Although the word niche often suggests a small and insignificant audience, targeting a niche early on in a business’s lifecycle is increasingly a go-to strategy. For these niche companies to succeed, they must garner the audience’s attention through their authenticity and relentless focus on the target they’re pursuing. But from here, growing the business further by thinking through the potential scale of niche products can sometimes be a challenge as niche brands move into mass markets.

This report looks at:

  • What’s happening with niche audiences and why does it matter for the larger consumer ecosystem?
  • What do these success and failures mean for brands, investors and real estate developers?
  • What should brands, investors and real estate developers do to harness the powers of niche audiences?

Takeaway

  • Niche brands that cater to audiences with specific needs have an easier time finding and engaging the right audiences early on.
  • But when niche brands need to grow beyond this initial audience, they need to evolve their offering without unspooling the fundamental economics of the business and the strength of the brand.
  • Brands that have successfully scaled from niche to general audiences have kept their initial adopters engaged while successfully translating their value proposition into a larger, mass-market context.

Case Studies

Bevel, The Honest Company, GoPro, Bonobos, Nike, Patagonia.

What’s happening and why does it matter?

Successes: What happens when niche brands intelligently scale?

The most successful niche brands have scaled by creating value-driven companies that consider their defining characteristics and become meaningful parts of consumers’ lives. Rather than solely relying on investors to push growth and scale onto consumers, they have expanded their focus by co-innovating with their shoppers and bringing them along for the ride. At the same time, the brand has the freedom to explore new verticals where it can make an impact.

Nike

When Phil Knight founded Nike in 1964, Adidas and Puma dominated the running shoe market. Nike broke into the space by creating a groundswell campaign that targeted small running clubs that were blossoming throughout the country. Knight’s obsession with creating better shoes using Japanese fabrics slowly built a community of people that felt invested in what he had to offer.

By focusing on constant innovation and listening to customers, the company grew from this niche and started to sell to a general audience by translating its message to the wider public. Nike began by selling shoes to runners and experimenting with which product innovations were useful to this audience. To successfully market to players of other sports, it started to think of the brand as different sub-brands it could market to. Starting with Air Jordans, Nike shoes for other sports took off and created even more revenue for the company and the brand soon moved on to shoes for tennis and football. When Reebok came out with its general fitness and aerobic shoe and took a large chunk of that market, Nike responded by creating a fitness line of its own. At this time, the company took on a more general ethos. According to Nike co-founder Bill Bowerman, “If you have a body, you are an athlete”.

Nike eventually became a lifestyle brand by continuing to expand its messaging and finding overlaps between its consumers. The company’s target audience evolved from hardcore athletes to people who liked sports because of marketing taglines and imagery. For example, its famous “Just Do It” campaign expands beyond the core motivations of hardcore athletes into the ones of would-be athletes (who need that extra motivation to start an exercise regimen). But this took many decades to pull off, evidence that there are no shortcuts to building a true lifestyle brand, which is earned, not bought.

Patagonia

Patagonia has gone through a similar life cycle, starting off as a rock-climbing accessory store, transitioning to a Rugby-shirt selling brand for rock climbers, moving on to other outdoor sports, and ultimately evolving into a lifestyle brand. It went from an alpine-focused company to selling outdoor clothing for a variety of activities including surfing and swimming.

Patagonia is a great example of a company that hasn’t sold out and continues to keep customers engaged. Although it ran into trouble in the 1990s and had to file Chapter 11 bankruptcy after over-scaling, founder Yvon Chouinard has since rethought his strategy. Since then, the company has reached $750 million in sales by staying true to its ethos and focusing on durable and simple clothes, great customer service, and a people-and-planet-friendly attitude. It uses sustainable materials, offers free clothing repairs, and provides excellent worker benefits.

The company has unapologetically stuck to its focus on sustainability, recently creating a campaign where it touted its brand’s durability and focus on the environment by selling items on Black Friday with tags that read “do not buy this jacket” in order to encourage people to keep using their clothes for as long as possible instead of purchasing needless items. Interestingly, this campaign resulted in an increase in Black Friday purchases for the company.

The company’s relentless push on quality, durability and its mission has fueled its success and it’s all been possible because of its non-reliance on investors. Patagonia has focused on growing intelligently. Instead of growing superficially, it became a “natural grower,” selling products that people want.

Failures: What happens when niche brands go astray?

As niche brands continue growing, they eventually saturate the market of early adopters. From here, these brands have to look at expanding outside of their niche into new products, markets or customers. This presents a challenge. The underlying fundamentals that make the brand successful early on don’t always hold as niche brands grow.

The Honest Company

Jessica Alba and The Honest Company team created a brand that has put pressure on traditional CPG manufacturers to make their products eco-friendlier and healthier in order to stay competitive. The company bet that these niche products—fragrance-free detergent, organic diapers, and plant-based cleaning supplies—could be attractive to a larger market than originally thought.

At a macro level, the top 25 companies’ share of U.S. food and beverage sales have shrunk since shoppers have been turning to smaller brands, with $20 billion in market share value transferred from big CPG companies to long-tail brands in the last six years. This trend should be promising for companies that start by serving niches such as The Honest Company, but creating a stable foundation to ride this shift is challenging, especially when a company has raised over $220 million in venture capital. This money and the associated expectations forced the brand to rapidly scale at all costs.

Although The Honest Company is rumored to be worth $1 billion dollars, it is struggling to grow. After initially focusing on a subscription offering and then direct-to-consumer sales, most of its new growth will likely come from wholesale. This will significantly impact projected margins, which are already thin for CPG products. The company has recently laid off workers, switched CEO’s, and has struggled to maintain its natural ingredients. Using niches to challenge an incumbent is one thing, but doing so profitably at scale is another. Brands moving from niche to broad audiences need to pay careful attention to their underlying unit economics and constantly project how targeting different customers changes the equation.

GoPro

GoPro initially found success by building a camera that captures the authenticity of adventurous pursuits. The early success drew attention from a larger audience than the brand initially targeted. Regular people, not just pros, started using the camera whenever they embarked on adventurous activities. GoPro was selling the experience of using the camera, not just the camera itself. The company’s strategy involved uploading adventurous videos online that showed users doing exciting things with the GoPro camera, a tactic that resulted in people watching over 50 million hours of videos where the word “GoPro” appeared as of 2014. This drew attention from the financial community and the company had an extremely large public offering, raising $427 million at a valuation of $2.96 billion.

However, GoPro suffered a big setback when it tried and failed to turn into a media company. This turbulence was the result of an attempt to scale beyond its core market. In order to build a successful company that catered to more than just athletes, the company had to convince people that they needed to use GoPro in their day-to-day lives. General markets are much harder to convince than niche ones. With the iPhone as the most successful camera in the world, GoPro remained a niche choice. If someone was going to carry one camera with them, it would likely be their phone. By attempting to scale beyond its core market, and funding the company on a level that gave it no choice but to keep growing, GoPro began to dilute its brand and its original value proposition. GoPro’s only path to growth was to spend more money to attract increasingly-less relevant customers.

Works in progress: Companies that are experimenting today

There is a new crop of companies coming up who target supposed niches such as Dia&Co, Eloquii, Blowbar, and Peter Manning. They focus on markets that have been previously underserved or underemphasized. At the same time, they are bringing more logic and patience to their growth strategies. One of them worth looking more closely at is Bevel.

Bevel

Tristan Walker started his holding company, Walker & Co., to cater to the personal care product needs of the underserved minority market, which has traditionally been relegated to the “ethnic aisle.” He launched his first brand, Bevel, which featured a single-blade razor system specifically created for ethnic men who tend to have coarser and curlier hair. He reached these consumers by first focusing on black barber shops and partnering with them so they received a commission when someone purchased a Bevel product, and then moving on to other small channels like niche podcasts. Most of the company’s growth has since come from word of mouth.

Specific communities are likely to pay attention when a brand builds a product or service just for them. At this point in the brand’s life cycle, the initial target audience is very receptive to on-brand messaging if the product meets their specific needs. Therefore, it’s cheaper and easier to market to niche audiences.

Walker struggled to find funding when he first started the company. The mostly white investors he spoke with didn’t instinctively understand the need for his product. However, Walker was able to initially procure $3 million and, by demonstrating that his was an important and underserved market, he recently raised $24 million. In 2014, subscriptions grew at an average of 50 percent month over month with more than 90 percent of consumers deciding to return. “The changing demographic in this country is the greatest economic opportunity of my lifetime, there’s an inevitability to this, and I think some of the greatest companies that will be built in the next 50 years will keep that in mind,” Walker says. As the company continues to grow, sales in 2017 are up 200 percent from last year, evidence that it is among the fastest growing new razor brands.

Walker and Company is going after a group of consumers that are far from a niche. There are over 50 million men and women who fall directly into the markets Walker and Company is serving, let alone the millions of others who can still gain a lot from their products. While the company has raised over $33 million in funding, it’s growing at a healthy pace and in a manner that sets it up to exist for the decades to come.

More recently, Bevel has moved into wholesale relationships with Target and Amazon. Walker and Company also launched FORM, its first brand for women that is focused on hair care for women of color. FORM also launched online and with Sephora, an important early partnership for the brand that still shows the power of both wholesale and retail. Interestingly, the Bevel shopper and the FORM shopper are often either related, in the same household, or in the same friend circles, which creates a virtuous marketing funnel where shoppers from each brand recommend the opposite brand to each other.

What does it mean for you?

Brands and Retailers

For brands and retailers that are looking to expand from their initial niche, it is important to authentically attract a wider range of consumers. Expanding for the sake of expanding and leaving core values in the dust is dangerous. Brands run the risk of becoming diluted and inauthentic.

There are a few key areas to pay attention to

  • Niche brands that hope to later serve mass audiences need to fund themselves in a rational manner. Taking on too much funding early on, which sets premature growth expectations, is a recipe for a short-lived brand. Instead, funding a brand in parallel to the initial opportunity ensures the company has the cash it needs to grow and expectations it can deliver on.
  • Niche brands also need to pay attention to the size and the scalability of the niche they first serve. The best niche brands have the ability to grow and evolve their existing offering for an increasingly larger audience, rather than completely restart their initial strategy. Niche brands need to be able to naturally transition from serving niche audience needs to mass audience needs, without alienating either constituency.

Investors

Investors need to know if a niche product or service has the potential to resonate early on, in addition to growing and scaling down the road.

  • Investors need to have diverse talent in their firms to help them better evaluate opportunities and invest in companies that not only cater to the coastal elite but also take into account the deep insights on niches. Investors should be the customers of a wide variety of products and brands.
  • Investors need to put realistic growth expectations on niche brands that allow them to continue supporting their early adopters while increasingly serving a wider audience. Growth for the sake of growth hurts a brand’s early supporters.
  • Investors need to pay extreme attention to the unit economics of different cohorts, especially around customer acquisition. Most brands are able to acquire customer relatively inexpensively early on, but these costs can significantly rise over time, sometimes resulting in negative unit economics. This should also be considered in early funding rounds.

Real Estate Developers

Niche audiences can bring fervent supporters into stores who may stick around for more. Real estate developers have a number of opportunities to leverage niche brands and audiences:

  • Real estate developers can make space for niche brands who will bring high volume and high affinity shoppers into stores. This will bring residual brand equity for retailers and increase their relevance, making it more probable that younger and wealthier shoppers set foot on the property. An expanding roster of newer brands will keep these shoppers coming back, as they will know that this property is always bringing in new and exciting shopping experiences, increasing foot traffic along the way.
  • Many of these new brands rely heavily on events to drive foot traffic. Providing them space and letting them tap into your existing infrastructure could create some interesting co-branding opportunities and continue driving foot traffic.
  • There are also opportunities to work with these brands to create special products that are only available offline, driving foot traffic to the property.
  • Real Estate developers should experiment with marketing that brings attention to the benefits of having these upcoming, niche brands within their walls. This will create initial excitement among consumers who are already visiting and are hoping for novelty and ensure practical shoppers stay inside the property for an added sense of joy and discovery.

What should you do about it?

Although it is difficult to scale a niche brand into one that appeals to a larger audience, it is well worth the effort since these brands have endured and continue to be leaders in their fields. For Nike and Patagonia, this took decades. It takes a constant focus on improving, the willingness to listen to customers, and the wherewithal to authentically expand to new audiences.

Brands

  1. How can you find and support niche audiences that are relevant to your mission?
  2. How can you figure out the number of loyal customers these niches have and if it can sustain a business? Could you combine multiple niches together that could be similarly served?
  3. Is is possible to reach a general audience in the beginning or is there a niche need inherent to your business model?
  4. How will you transition from a niche business to a mass business as you scale?
  5. How will your unit economics hold up as you make this transition? Which unique type of customer acquisition tool can you use to reach this audience sustainably?
  6. How can you determine if your products will have the same degree of appeal to a mass audience as they do to a niche audience? Do you need to change the product for it to apply more broadly?
  7. What are the short-term and long-term profitability implications of scaling from a niche or beginning a niche strategy?
  8. How can you position yourself for long-term loyalty for both niche and mass audiences?

Financial Investors

  1. Why did the company pick their niche? Do they truly understand it and have experience working in it? What expertise can your bring to it?
  2. How will the unit economics in the niche scale outside of it? Does the business unwind or strengthen as it scales?
  3. How will the niche audience grow as the brand scales? Will it you need to move into new niches to keep growing?
  4. How can you determine if the team is best qualified to serve this audience?
  5. How can you measure if the audience has the dollars to support this brand?
  6. Which competitors are already serving this audience? Is the field wide open? How will this competition affect the brand’s growth?
  7. How will the brand find other pockets of your initial niche audience as you begin scaling?

Real Estate Developers

  1. How should your properties attract shoppers who are used to shopping online for their preferred brands? How can your properties use this information to tweak their marketing strategies?
  2. Where do relevant niche audience, which are proximate to your properties, live and spend their time? What are their hobbies? How can properties become seamless parts of this audience’s life?
  3. How should your properties approach their mass market marketing strategies after adding niche stores and more unique brands into their assortments?
  4. What does a post-internet-era mall look like that caters to mass and niche audiences?
  5. If you are going to allow niche brands to open on your properties, what differentiates the new customer base from your existing one? Where do niches audiences shop? How can your properties strategically put stores in the right locations for these niches as you scale?
  6. Are there any larger retailers the niche brands in your property can partner with to set up store-within-a-store spaces that will help spur initial sales? How can you facilitate this?
  7. What existing real estate concepts can you use for your properties? Is there anything more experimental you can do to bring more unique tenants into your properties?


User Generated Content Strategies

Preview

Shoppers produce an immense amount of user generated content (UGC) every day, with 54% of adult internet users taking and sharing photos. As such, UGC is a large portion of the content people see on a day-to-day basis. This content can be used to drive brand equity and sales because it tells genuine stories about brands and products, which resonate with consumers and incites trust. In 2017, companies are taking UGC even further by creating unique products to specifically attract Instagram-attention (and are “instagrammable”) and building companies that are centered and fueled around UGC and user-community.

This article is exclusive to Loose Threads Members, who get access to actionable analysis, insights and private events that help you drive growth in the rapidly changing consumer economy.


Blockchain

Preview

The internet transformed business and society by allowing people to leverage the platform to quickly engage with people all over the world. New companies and business models were created, disrupting old giants and creating new structural foundations for society.

Blockchain takes the powers of the internet even further and proposes a new model for society and commerce. Trust is built between separate actors through an immutable, shared ledger that records transactions and actions. Although the technology is still in its very early stages, it’s already making inroads in finance, technology, and global trade.

Blockchain gives the new, purpose-minded consumer peace of mind since it can provide accurate information on how products are sourced, the materials that went into making the product, and how the labor that made the products was compensated. It also gives actors the ability to create smart contracts, ensuring they will have authentic and verified business transactions.

This article is exclusive to Loose Threads Members, who get access to actionable analysis, insights and private events that help you drive growth in the rapidly changing consumer economy.


The Niche Audience Report

How are companies launching and scaling with niche audiences?

Takeaway

  • Niche brands that cater to audiences with specific needs have an easier time finding and engaging the right audiences early on.
  • But when niche brands need to grow beyond this initial audience, they need to evolve their offering without unspooling the fundamental economics of the business and the strength of the brand.
  • Brands that have successfully scaled from niche to general audiences have kept their initial adopters engaged while successfully translating their value proposition into a larger, mass-market context.

Case Studies

Bevel, The Honest Company, GoPro, Bonobos, Nike, Patagonia.

This is Part II of a series on how brands are starting and growing by targeting general audiences.

Even the most seemingly revolutionary products can fail if they are unable to engage an audience. According to Harvard Business Review, American families repeatedly buy the same 150 items for their household needs. Getting shoppers to consider a new product is difficult. If huge companies that already know their customers and have proven business models are having trouble with new products, new and unproven entrants must pay even more attention to how they are going after early adopters who often reside in niches.

Although the word niche often suggests a small and insignificant audience, targeting niche audiences early in a business’s life cycle is an increasingly popular strategy. For niche companies to succeed, they must garner the audience’s attention through their authenticity and relentless focus on the target they’re pursuing. Niche brands have an opportunity to cater to specialized interests and behaviors because the relatively small market allows them to serve an audience’s specific needs. But from here, growing the business further by thinking through the potential scale of niche products can sometimes be a challenge as niche brands move into general markets.

This piece looks at niche business strategies and audiences, specifically:

  1. How can companies start and grow by going after niche audiences?
  2. Can niche brands target general audiences to keep growing?
  3. What challenges do niche brands face as they start targeting general audiences?

Launching into a niche market

Niche brands take advantage of whitespaces in the market, which helps to diminish risk. With advances in social and digital media, these brands can systematically reach different populations which maximizes the chances that their products will succeed. They can target people who are likely to be receptive to new products and who will pay premium prices for them.

Bevel

Tristan Walker started his holding company, Walker & Co., to cater to the personal care product needs of the underserved minority market, which has been relegated to the “ethnic aisle.” He launched his first brand, Bevel, which featured a single-blade razor system specifically created for ethnic men who tend to have coarser and curlier hair. He reached these consumers by first focusing on black barber shops and partnering with them so they received a commission when someone purchased a Bevel product, and then moving on to other small channels like niche podcasts. Most of the company’s growth has since come from word of mouth.

Specific communities are likely to pay attention when a brand builds a product or service just for them. At this point in the brand’s life cycle, the initial target audience is very receptive to on-brand messaging if the product meets their specific needs. Therefore, it’s cheaper and easier to market to niche audiences.

Walker struggled to find funding when he first started the company. The mostly white investors he spoke with didn’t instinctively understand the need for his product. However, Walker was able to initially procure $3 million and, by demonstrating that his was an important and underserved market, he recently raised $24 million. In 2014, subscriptions grew at an average of 50 percent month over month with more than 90 percent of consumers deciding to return. “The changing demographic in this country is the greatest economic opportunity of my lifetime, there’s an inevitability to this, and I think some of the greatest companies that will be built in the next 50 years will keep that in mind,” Walker says. As the company continues to grow, sales in 2017 are up 200 percent from last year, evidence that it is among the fastest growing new razor brands.

Companies that go for niche audiences can hit on very particular pain points and ensure that they get one thing right, which then gives them the space to focus on selling more product and evolving as a brand.

Growing niche brands

As niche brands continue growing, they eventually saturate the market by selling to most of their early adopters. From here, these brands have to look at expanding outside of their niche into new products, markets or customers. This presents a challenge—the underlying fundamentals that make the brand successful don’t always hold as niche brands grow.

The Honest Company

The Honest Company introduced organic products to the baby and home consumer packaged goods (CPG) industry, which challenged legacy players. The company bet that these niche products—fragrance-free detergent, organic diapers, and plant-based cleaning supplies—could be attractive to a larger market than originally thought. Jessica Alba and The Honest Company team created a brand that has put pressure on traditional CPG manufacturers to make their products more eco-friendly and healthy in order to stay competitive. The top 25 companies’ share of U.S. food and beverage sales have shrunk since shoppers have been turning to smaller brands, with $20 billion in market share value transferred from big CPG companies to long-tail brands in the last six years.

Although The Honest Company is rumored to be worth $1 billion dollars, it is struggling to grow. After initially focusing on direct-to-consumer sales, most of its new growth will likely come from wholesale. The company has recently laid off workers, switched CEO’s, and has struggled to maintain its natural ingredients. Using niches to challenge an incumbent is one thing, but doing so profitably at scale is another. Brands moving from niche to broad audiences need to pay careful attention to their underlying unit economics and constantly project how targeting different customers changes the equation.

GoPro

GoPro initially found success by building a camera that captures the authenticity of adventurous pursuits. The early success drew attention from a larger audience than the brand initially targeted. Regular people, not just pros, started using the camera whenever they did adventurous activities. GoPro was selling the experience of using the camera rather than the camera itself. The company’s strategy involved uploading adventurous videos online that showed users doing exciting things with the GoPro camera, a tactic that resulted in people watching over 50 million hours of videos where the word “GoPro” appeared in the first quarter of 2014. This drew attention from the financial community and the company had an extremely large public offering and raised $427 million at a valuation of $2.96 billion.

However, GoPro suffered a big setback when it tried and failed to turn into a media company. This turbulence is the result of an attempt to scale beyond its core market. In order to scale beyond athletes, the company must convince people that they need to use GoPro in their day-to-day lives. Yet with the iPhone as the most successful camera in the world, GoPro remained a niche choice. If someone was going to carry one camera with them, it would likely be their phone. General markets are much harder to convince than niche ones. By attempting to scale beyond its core market, it began to dilute its brand and its original value proposition. GoPro’s only path to growth was to spend more money to attract increasingly-less relevant customers.

Bonobos

Bonobos has faced a similar issue as it’s looked to continue to grow beyond its target audience and core value proposition. Bonobos originally grew out of the idea of creating a perfect pair of pants for the young and affluent buyer. When Bonobos launched, it had a very limited number of SKUs. But as it grew, their assortment ballooned to 1,308 SKU, according to EDITED. This is not far from J.Crew’s 1,630 options for menswear and Gap’s 2,303. This over-scaling caused the brand to lose focus and expand into too many products.

Niche brands that have successfully scaled

The most successful niche brands have scaled by creating value-driven companies that consider their defining characteristics and become meaningful parts of consumers’ lives. Rather than relying on investors to push growth and scale onto consumers, they have expanded their focus by co-innovating with their buyers and bringing them along for the ride. They act as leaders that larger audiences want to be a part of. Through this, shoppers begin to covet and co-identify with the brand. At the same time, the brand has the freedom to explore new verticals where they can make an impact.

Nike

When Phil Knight founded Nike in 1964, Adidas and Puma dominated the running shoe market. The company broke into the market by creating a groundswell campaign that targeted small running clubs that were blossoming throughout the country. His obsession with creating better shoes using Japanese fabrics slowly created a community of people that felt invested in his shoes and excited by what he had to offer.

By focusing on constant innovation and listening to customers, the company grew from this niche and started to sell to a general audience by translating its message to the wider public. Nike began by selling shoes to runners and experimenting with which product innovations were useful to this audience. To successfully market to players of other sports, they started to think of the brand as different sub-brands they could market to these new audiences. Starting with Air Jordans, Nike shoes for other sports took off and created even more revenue for the company. They moved on to shoes for tennis and football. When Reebok came out with its general fitness and aerobic shoe and took a large chunk of that market, Nike responded by creating a fitness line of its own. According to Nike co-founder Bill Bowerman, “If you have a body, you are an athlete”.

Nike eventually became a lifestyle brand by continuing to expand its messaging and finding overlaps between its consumers. The company’s target audience evolved from hardcore athletes to people who liked sports because of marketing taglines and imagery. For example, its famous “Just Do It” campaign expands beyond the core motivations of hardcore athletes into the ones of would-be athletes (who need that extra motivation to start an exercise regimen). But this took many decades to pull off, evidence that there are no shortcuts to building a true lifestyle brand, which is earned, not bought.

Patagonia

Patagonia has gone through a similar life cycle, starting off as a rock-climbing accessory store, transitioning to a Rugby-shirt selling brand for rock climbers, moving on to other outdoor sports, and ultimately evolving into a lifestyle brand. It went from an alpine-focused company to selling outdoor clothing for a variety of activities including surfing and swimming.

Patagonia is a great example of a company that hasn’t sold out and continues to keep customers engaged. Although it ran into trouble in the 1990s and had to file Chapter 11 bankruptcy after over-scaling, the CEO rethought his strategy. Since then, the company has reached $1 billion in sales by staying true to its ethos and focusing on durable and simple clothes, great customer service, and a people-and-planet-friendly attitude—it uses sustainable materials, offers free clothing repairs, and provides excellent worker benefits.

The company has unapologetically stuck to its focus on sustainability, recently creating a campaign where it touted its brand’s durability and its focus on the environment by selling items on Black Friday with tags that read “do not buy this jacket” in order to encourage people to keep using their clothes for as long as possible instead of purchasing needless items. Interestingly, this campaign resulted in an increase in Black Friday purchases for the company.

The company’s relentless push on quality, durability and its mission has fueled its success and it’s all been possible because of its non-reliance on investors. Patagonia has focused on growing intelligently. Instead of growing superficially they became “natural growers,” focusing on selling products that people want.

Although it is difficult to scale a niche brand into one that appeals to a larger audience, it is well worth the effort. The brands have endured and continue to be leaders in their fields. For Nike and Patagonia, this took decades. It took Nike 22 years to reach $1 billion in revenue and Patagonia has an estimated 750 million in revenue after 44 years and consistently takes home healthy profits. It takes the dedication to constantly focus on improving, the willingness to listen to customers, and the wherewithal to authentically expand to new audiences.

Wrap Up

Starting a brand using niche tactics is a prudent way to get off the ground by taking advantage of whitespace. However, niche brands can fail when they start to grow inauthentically and expand for the sake of expanding, leaving their core values in the dust. Companies that have successfully grown from niche to mass have kept their mission at the core and stayed true to themselves. They’ve taken their time to co-innovate with their audiences and found overlaps between their current and future audience, all to ensure that consumers want to associate with the brand as it becomes a larger lifestyle company. These companies have invited everyone in on the niche and successfully translated their value proposition into a larger, mass context.

The Cut Ticket

The Cut Ticket provides tactical questions that help you take action.

Brands

  1. What are the unique qualities of the niche you want to go after?
  2. Does it have enough loyal customers to sustain a business?
  3. How will you transition from a niche business to a mass business as you scale?
  4. How will your unit economics hold up as you make this transition?
  5. Will your products have the same degree of appeal to a mass audience as they do to a niche audience? Or do you need to change the product for it to apply more broadly?
  6. Is there something authentic you stand for that will garner attention for the brand as consumers look to authentic experiences?

Financial Investors

  1. Why did the company pick their niche? Do they truly understand it and have experience working in it?
  2. Are the unit economics in the niche scaleable outside of it? Or does the business unwind as it scales?
  3. Is the audience large enough to scale the brand or will the company need to move into different niches to keep growing?
  4. What makes this team best qualified to serve this audience?
  5. Does this audience have the dollars to support this brand?
  6. Are there competitors serving this audience or is the field wide open?


The Mass Market Audience Report

How are companies launching and scaling with general audiences?

Takeaway

  • Building for a general audience often requires companies to look beyond the coastal cities they are most familiar with. This means building for the 99%, not just the 1%.
  • Quidsi and Hollar, which target the general population, have grown by focusing on universal pain points that impact people regardless of location, which legacy brands ignored.
  • While going after a mass audience works for some time, eventually these companies need to segment their audience into niches and serve them differently.

Case Studies

Hollar, Amazon Prime, Diapers.com & Jet.com, Hilton, CB2, JCPenney, Sephora.

This is Part I of a two-part series on starting and growing brands through general and niche audiences.

Brands usually start by targeting a niche or mass audience. One is not better than the other, but each has trade-offs.

A niche audience is small and specialized. Catering to a niche gives a brand the opportunity to learn an immense amount of information by maintaining a personal connection with its customers. However, a niche brand’s potential scale is not always clear.

A general audience is large and broad. This might give brands less actionable information about each customer, but the potential scale makes up for the shallow amount of data. The path to reaching massive scale, however, is not always clear.

Because the Internet has transformed the ways in which brands can launch and grow, democratizing access to both general and niche audiences, what type of audience should brands start with?

This piece focuses on general audiences, specifically:

  1. How can companies start by going after general audiences?
  2. How can companies targeting mass audiences drive growth by serving new niches?

Starting with general audiences

General audiences gravitate towards brands with accessible products that provide wide-ranging value. If the product adds some marginal value—it’s a cheaper alternative or improves the experience—it has a solid chance of succeeding.

Thinking of consumers as one large group changes the strategy around a company, who must then think of its business model more broadly. Like pop songs and box-office hits, going after a general audience provides an opportunity to capitalize on the commonalities of a large population, giving a brand the opportunity to scale.

Building for the 99%

In the US specifically, the biggest audiences are not in the coastal cities (from which founders and VC’s tend to hail). Some call the targeting of these large audiences building for the 99%, not the 1%.

Hollar

Hollar, an online dollar store, started off by capturing a general market, namely, the middle-American buyers that Silicon Valley has traditionally underserved. The founder, former Honest Company VP David Yeom, came from a family that shopped at dollar stores in order to purchase goods in large quantities without having to worry too much about the price, a behavior that is prevalent in middle America. According to Yeom, the concept of a dollar store “suffers from some perception and stigma…but 80 million people shop at these places. When you talk about massive scale, that’s what this industry is all about.”

To meet this need, he started a company that focused on recreating the dollar store experience online—users scroll through the site and find items just like they would at an actual dollar store. Most of the items sell for $5 or less and no item sells for over $10. It worked to capture the general market—80% of the company’s orders come from outside of California and New York, a great example of a brand growing out of one of the largest cities in the U.S. to reach a general market. The company has grown quickly and is already creating its own private-label products based on its customers’ needs.

Sliding-scale pricing

Pricing on a sliding scale is another way to go after a general audience. The concept of giving a different price to different consumers based on their incomes is prevalent in regions like Latin America where the general population is split up into social classes that pay varying prices for heating, air, apartments, and other goods.

With such a large middle class in the United States, the practice of charging varying prices for the same good or service has been useful for some companies. In the past, amusement parks and museums have charged different prices based on different factors such as student status and retirement age. With the advantage of the Internet, it is possible to emulate this behavior in order to appeal to the public and become a company that the majority of the population can use.

Amazon Prime

For example, in response to different e-tailers reaching a cheaper and price-conscious audience, Amazon is now trying to get the general market to choose Prime. They’ve recently launched a discounted membership to shoppers on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). With this, Amazon is luring discount shoppers online to their site and shifting their need to go to Walmart for the best prices ($1 out of every $5 from SNAP currently goes to Walmart). With 43 million Americans on the SNAP program, this could bring in millions of new members to Prime, which already boasts an estimated 80 million customers.

Diapers.com & Jet.com

Looking at mothers’ predilection and need to continuously stock up on certain diapers, entrepreneur Marc Lore started Diapers.com, which rewarded consumers for using his site to make essential baby purchases through discounts and seamless delivery options. The site became so popular that they initiated a price war with Amazon, who tried to undercut their price and created Amazon Mom, in order to take a piece of the pie.

His next company was Jet.com, which offered a 15 percent discount on its items, playing on people’s need for a discount rather than focusing on free shipping like Amazon. Even the 5 percent undercut on prices paired with an absent membership fee was enough to pull some consumers away from other companies. The site’s focus on the general market made a huge dent in the ecommerce space and became a quick competitor to Amazon, even when other companies like Walmart had been scrambling to catch up to the giant.

The companies mentioned above used a mass strategy to attract a general audience, scale up, raise millions of dollars, and ultimately become threats to other mass retailers. They’ve all fundamentally reinvented the concept of shopping for everyday consumer goods and have focused their attention on solving general pain points.

Amazon acquired Mark Lore’s first company once it started a price war, leaving Lore no choice but to sell. Walmart bought Jet for three billion dollars in cash, indicating Jet’s mass strategy paid off handsomely and led to a high valuation that brought money to its founders.

To grow, general brands go niche

Once a brand goes after a huge market, at a certain point it needs to break the market into individual segments to grow further. The shifting consumer landscape and differing consumer trends eventually necessitate a change in business strategy. Starting from general and then moving to a niche audience can be very powerful for brands that want to reach new audiences.

To realize the potential of niche audiences, general brands are adding layers to their targeting strategies by strategically thinking of people as part of different “personas,” “groups,” or “types.” Using a mix of art and science, brands seek to understand who their consumers (or potential consumer groups) are, and strategically target them by their passions, pain points, and behavioral needs.

One published example of a persona comes from Women’s Marketing, a beauty consulting company. It recently created a series of five distinct personas that reflect the female American beauty consumer. Using the nuanced information people provide through their digital media profiles, they came up with five groups: the Elemental, the Enterprising Mom, the Established Mom, the Passionista, and the Super Beauty. Each of these five personas looks at beauty in different ways and doesn’t need to necessarily align on specific shopping behavior, geography or social class. They have groups of overlapping attributes that make them fall into a certain persona. The Elemental might find herself drawn to the “the natural, woke-up-like-this look,” while the Super Beauty is “the go-to fashion expert among her friends and family” who also happens to like shopping alone. Brands can find these different personas by considering what type of information they’d like to find about consumers, competitors’ consumers, or specific people, and then analyzing information based off of this.

Hilton

As Airbnb starts taking market share from hotels, larger chains have started responding in kind by creating hotel concepts targeted to the Millennial consumer who wants different things from her hotel experience. For example, Hilton announced a new brand called “Tru by Hilton” in 2016. It centers around the premise of targeting and maintaining Millennial travelers. These hotels have a coworking vibe in the lobby and offer customizable breakfast options, wireless printing, and other amenities in exchange for smaller, more functional rooms. This might not appeal to older business travelers that want all the in-room comforts they are accustomed to, but it is a prudent way to reach adventurers and young travelers and compete with Airbnb and even hostels. According to Christopher J. Nassetta, president and CEO of Hilton Worldwide, Tru is “on the fast track to becoming our largest brand.”

CB2

Crate and Barrel launched CB2 in 2000. The store targets younger city-dwellers and features smaller items that fit in seamlessly with apartment living. The store is a minimalist and modern version of Crate and Barrel. Think airy Williamsburg loft vs. a classic Upper East Side apartment. CB2 started in Chicago and, since then, has moved into other urban areas like New York. It also features cheaper prices and funky styles, which helped refresh the company and brought new consumers into the mix.

Instead of making the general brand larger by using the same strategies and audiences as before, CB2 and even West Elm, a subsidiary to the more traditional Williams Sonoma, thought through their unique selling proposition to ensure that they continue to evolve as time passes, tastes change, and the dominant consumer also evolves. General brands that want to keep growing likely need to employ the same strategy.

Sephora x JCPenney

Legacy brands can also partner with smaller or more niche players in order to refresh their brands and join in on a niche space. Using strategic partnerships to attract niche shoppers can be a powerful strategy for large players who don’t want to change their whole business model or create their own new brands. For example, JCPenney brought Millennials into its stores by partnering with Sephora in its more upscale locations, which it has been doing for the last ten years. The company is now expanding its Sephora store-within-a-store concept to even more locations, which has increased the number of young shoppers. JCPenney stores with Sephora’s in them average more sales per square foot than those without them (over three times more at $500-$600 per square foot).

By focusing first on the mass market and increasingly targeting niche audiences, brands can add new layers and fresh thinking that ultimately reaches and engages more potential buyers than a general brand could have reached or captured on its own.

Wrap Up

Starting with general markets and then growing through niche strategies has its upsides. It’s possible to start by focusing on the commonalities of a large portion of the population. To keep scaling, brands eventually need to go after more specific niches by targeting specific behaviors. The ability to move between thinking broadly and specifically will only increase a brand’s value.

Part II will focus on starting with a niche strategy and eventually scaling it with general audiences.

The Cut Ticket

The Cut Ticket provides tactical questions that help you take action.

Brands

  1. If your brand targets a general audience, have you saturated the market for your products?
  2. What niche audiences are logical evolutions for you to drive growth?
  3. Are you able to reach these new niche audiences with your same product assortment, or do you need to develop new ones?
  4. What audiences could you go after that your company is uniquely poised to compete for?
  5. Do these new audiences require you to master new acquisition channels or use your existing expertise?
  6. Will these new audiences continue growing over time or are they flat or shrinking?

Financial Investors

  1. Why did the company start with the audience that it did?
  2. Does the team have domain expertise in the space and/or are they the target customer?
  3. Will this audience continue growing over time and can the company continue reaching this audience as it scales?
  4. How will the unit economics scale as the company grows? What ensures they won’t turn negative or become wildly less profitable?
  5. Is the company only going after consumers that are “like them,” or are they thinking through which other audiences they can target?
  6. Is the company using sustainable sales channels? Are there macro concerns that costs will continue rising?
  7. How capital intensive will it be to scale this business to a general audience and then to various niches?


The Rental Economy Report

How are companies taking advantage of the rental economy?

Takeaway

  • Rent the Runway dresses are rented around 30 times at prices ranging from 10-20% of their retail price. Renting allows them to gross 3-6x the price of each item, compared to a one-time purchase.
  • Retailers are taking notice of the successful rental partnerships Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus have established with the Black Tux and Rent the Runway, which are bringing younger shoppers to their stores.
  • Renting does not need to diminish brand value or exclusivity, which is best maintained by keeping the associated brand and its aesthetics intact.

Case Studies

Rent the Runway, The Black Tux, Le Tote, Uber.

Audio Edition

The move towards sharing and using instead of direct ownership is often called the Sharing Economy. People are increasingly comfortable using items that others have used before. Specifically for younger populations, owning seems like an expensive burden they don’t want to take on when they can just rent something for a fraction of the price without having to make a lasting commitment. Why buy a ton of movies and songs when they can just be streamed or rented from a large library for a flat, monthly fee?

It is now cheaper than ever to own a proliferation of material possessions and having a ton of “stuff” is no longer a good sign of adulthood or considered evidence of middle class status. Instead of having pride in being a family that owns two cars or a large house, millennials place higher value in having an engaging and fun lifestyle. More than that, people are now aware of the process that goes into making this excess of material goods and concerns about the environment, international worker rights, and not finding fulfillment among their possessions has guided people to feel more secure in buying less material goods and renting more often.

The rental model is most common as a viable business model for cars, homes, machinery, and other highly durable items. While Mom & Pop tuxedo companies and the mass market “Men’s Wearhouse” have traditionally rented out tuxes to men in the past, the rental market has been rather limited within fashion and apparel otherwise. In the last few years, however, renting has taken the fashion market by storm as it becomes a relatively new way to sell consumer goods.

This piece explores the pillars, benefits and pitfalls of a rental model for consumer goods companies. As more brands explore implementing renting as either a core part of their business or as an experiment, there are a number of important factors to pay attention to.

The core of the rental model

Determining the viability of a rental model comes down to three main factors: 1) how durable the goods are; 2) how many cycles the products can last for; and 3) what is the best way to make money from the products. Companies must also take consumer behavior into account and ensure that there’s a group of people that are willing and able to rent out their products.

Durable goods

Durable goods are crucial for the viability of a rental business model, and are often defined as items that can last three years or more. With fast-fashion brands having a hegemony over young-adult fashion, clothing as a durable good has taken a backseat as consumers purchase more disposable apparel products instead of investing in lasting pieces. When renting out a fashion item, however, the item must be a durable good that could be used multiple times and by multiple people, much like fine jewelry or quality leather jackets.

Interestingly, when asked about their perceptions of products, both Millennials and Generation X’ers choose “durable” as the word that described high-quality products best, followed by premium, craftsmanship, and luxury, according to Mintel. The connotation of high quality given by the word “durable” suggests that people aren’t only attracted to high-status luxury items for their closets, but they also want fashion items that are strong and long lasting. This helps to explain why a market exists for retailers like Everlane and L.L Bean, whose most recent commercial strongly intimated at their quality guarantee with the voiceover stating: “When did we stop valuing things to get better over time? When did disposable become our default?”

Promoting the long-lasting and strong, quality materials that clothes are made of has proven viable because consumers are starting to become “ingredient-focused.” In the same way that some consumers want to know every ingredient and process that goes into the food that they consume, many are starting to take this approach to fashion and turn their nose up at the artificial materials and cheap fabrics many clothing items are made of. Fast-fashion retailers can’t play in the space for durability and therefore quality, where the material that an item is made from is less important than the trendiness of their pieces.

In the rental space, Rent the Runway Unlimited and Le Tote have started to promulgate a revolving closet of quality clothes that people can pay a monthly fee to access. The goal is to give every consumer a huge closet of high-quality clothing they can wear year-round. However, these services have yet to become mainstream. There are some consumer pain points that they haven’t figured out how to solve yet such as keeping quality high, finding the ideal number of outfit rotations a month, and increasing adoption rates. There is still space for high-quality items to get consumer attention, especially if brands can show that their products are durable and good investment pieces.

Depreciation

Depreciation is the second important factor in a rental business model. Brands must strategize around how quickly an item will go down in value after being used by multiple people, and if its value will stay flat or even increase with time.

While renting and leasing cars is known to bring the value of the product down the moment someone drives off the lot, and then every day after, renting out music and digital goods is absent from this classic deteriorating process. The internet unleashed the premise that digital goods can scale infinitely with zero marginal costs. Netflix, at a high level, benefits from this reality. The shows it produces in-house have a fixed cost and then can scale globally.

The depreciation on high-quality fashion goods falls somewhere in between digital and traditional physical goods. For most consumers, it is often difficult to tell how many times an item has been used or worn since there is no definite way for the consumer to count. Companies that rent out clothing or fashion items don’t usually reveal this information and consumers usually don’t demand it. With no mile reader, these items must retain their quality by being durable to begin with, undergoing successful dry-cleaning processes, and being cared for by the people that rent them. The more an item retains its value through the rental process, the more times it can be rented out while commanding high rental prices.

With Rent the Runway, for example, the number of times a dress has been worn isn’t shared with the consumer, creating the ability to rent at the same price throughout the process. The average Rent the Runway piece goes to customers around thirty times before it is sold at a sample sale and deemed too used to be rented out anymore. Rent the Runway goes through extensive dry cleaning processes, hiring only the best “spotters,” who are paid upwards of $30 an hour, to clean the clothes and make sure they don’t depreciate in value or someone that rents the dress spots something on it that they don’t like.

Extracting Value

While the rental model might not work for cheap, commodity items like socks and t shirts, it holds promise for more durable and lasting goods. As such, there is a chance to extract more value from it using different marketing techniques and business models.

Renting or selling a used item creates a new market for people who aren’t willing to pay full price or are more price sensitive than those who purchase new and shiny full-fledged products. For example, durable goods such as the latest smartphones are usually sold to the relatively small population of people that are willing to pay their full retail price. Then, when a newer item comes out, these items are sold by the original purchasers in a secondhand, open market where people willing to pay less than full-price can purchase them. This not only puts products into more hands but also incentivizes the original purchasers of the phone to upgrade to the newest model. Original purchasers can offset the price of their new phones by selling the old phones to more price-sensitive consumers and then buy an expensive, new product, ultimately putting more money into the company’s coffers.

Renting out fashion products has this potential to extract extra value from items that either the least price sensitive consumers have already used or that people who are willing to pay less can use. Rent the Runway dresses are typically rented at prices ranging from ten to twenty percent their retail price and as mentioned above, are rented out about thirty times. This indicates that RTR can stand to gross three to six times the price of the item if purchased at full price. After this cycle is completed, the brand then sells the pieces at sample sales or on their website, garnering even more value from them. With the right rental model, margins and topline revenue can be much greater than selling wholesale and even direct to consumer in one-off transactions.

Similar to low price schemes used by the likes of Uber to hook people to their app, renting out fashion items has the potential to increase brand affinity, awareness and topline sales. When Uber puts out a new service like uberPOOL or uberCOMMUTE, they start by charging a very low price that makes it easy for people to choose to use the new service. After people use it a few times or for a few weeks, some people become reliant on the service and stick with it even if the price goes up, which even chips away at the price sensitivity for some as the app becomes part of their routines.

By charging less for a fashion brand via renting, a brand can resonate more as it reaches a larger number of people who now have the chance to experience it first-hand, in addition to noticing how they feel and look when they wear a higher quality item. The more they wear and rent from a certain brand, the less likely some people are to be satisfied with the low-quality goods, which are a constant threat for middle and upper market brands today. Similar to how Uber can make people feel like getting on the subway or walking home seem like a chore once they’ve gotten a taste of the good life, shoppers can grow familiar with wearing high-quality brands, which can extract more value from the products in the long run.

Benefits

While purchasing online, showing pictures of regular people wearing luxury goods, and renting fashion items might have been unheard of in the past when luxury goods were meant to be the pinnacle of fashion and exclusivity, new behaviors and ways of thinking have entered the consumer conscience. This is unearthing possibilities for new business models that can be both viable and profitable. When surveyed where they purchased their first luxury goods eighteen to twenty four year olds were the most likely to have made their first luxury purchase online, by far the highest percent of people sampled at fourteen percent, according to eMarketer.

With Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus starting partnerships with the Black Tux and Rent the Runway respectively, retailers have spotted something in the rental and digital-first model that can help out their businesses. Both retailers are trying to get younger shoppers into their stores as the average Rent the Runway and Black Tux consumer is twenty nine, much lower than their current shoppers. These partnerships and forays into renting are helping stores become more relevant to the younger set as they start competing with digital-first companies and other more-relevant stores.

Renting can also be a tactic that brings potential buyers closer to a brand. Retailers that have traditionally used cheaper items in their lines like phone cases, coin purses, or key chains to get their brands on the radar of younger consumers can use renting as a similar tactic, getting the brand into the hands of people who wouldn’t have purchased the item otherwise and upping brand recognition and even future sales. Instead of trying to ladder up to the core brand using these cheaper items, renting allows brands to cut to the chase and have consumers experience their brand in its pure form. According to the founders of Rent the Runway, they had to explain to the designers they were working with that renting wouldn’t take away from their own sales but rather, they would be competing with fast-fashion retailers like H&M and Zara that these younger consumers were buying their dresses from. In this way, renting out items gives new life and opportunity for these brands.

Pitfalls

While there are lot of benefits and untapped opportunities with renting, there are some challenges that brands need to control for. Having a brand try out the rental model can result in changing consumer expectations, something that can be dangerous for brands if not treated correctly. Expectations on the future price of a product play a large part in a customer’s decision to buy or rent out a product, according to Duke business professor and rental-market expert Debu Purohit. The brand must ensure that the consumers who are willing to pay the retail value of a product aren’t stopped from doing so and that renting itself is not a discount, but a new way to try and purchase items. This is a thorny issue that retailers often deal with when thinking about their sale and coupon cycles. Brands must be careful to ensure consumers that the price of their products will remain high so that consumers don’t think they are getting a bad deal and convince themselves to forgo their purchase.

It is also important to think about the timing of when a product comes into the rental market. Renting out items as soon as they hit the runway might not be prudent for a brand that wants its consumers to retain a sense of urgency for purchase. Alternatively, there is also the possibility of giving out the most exclusive items for rent, so that multiple people can experience it at first before there’s a chance to mass produce them. According to Karen Katz, CEO of Neiman Marcus Group, “part of the problem (of sales going down) is the desire of shoppers to buy what they see on runways or written up in blogs right away, rather than the months it takes for such clothes to get to stores”. This is similar to the thought movie studios have to put behind the “windowing” process, when they figure out the right timing of when a movie is released first in theaters, then to video on demand, and finally to Netflix and iTunes and how consumers are starting to grow more impatient as they can’t immediately see a movie that was out in theaters on their Netflix accounts. Brands need to navigate these changes when exploring the rental model, which is entirely possible with explicit consideration of the possible challenges.

Wrap up

As renting continues to become part of the business models of new and mature brands, it’s important for companies to go back to the fundamentals of the renting process in order to ensure that items remain valuable and the business remains profitable. Companies must also explore how they can take ideas from other profitable industries (like the tech industry) to create strong brands that attract consumers of all ages. Finally, they must adapt to the changing consumer conscience where sharing is okay and owning a multitude of items is no longer considered tantamount.

The Cut Ticket

The Cut Ticket provides tactical questions that help you take action.

Brands

  1. Think about your brand, its core customers, and customers you would like to have in the future. How would the rental model get your brand closer to this audience?
  2. Map out all of the brands and product categories that exist within your company. Does creating a new place for young adults to come in contact with your brand make sense, or could it be incorporated into your existing offering?
  3. What is the level of depreciation of the items that you sell? Can you extract extra value from any of them by renting them out or doing different things with them?
  4. Could renting replace sales or excessive markdowns?
  5. How do you currently get more price sensitive consumers introduced to your brand? Can you create a process that makes their price sensitivity decrease after continued use?
  6. What are the biggest barriers for consumers utilizing your brand? Can getting closer to rental models fix any of these barriers?
  7. Can you partner with any rental companies that can bring a larger audience to your retail store, learn from them, and then launch your own model in due time?

Financial Investors

  1. When looking at a company with a rental model, how are they planning to keep their items in top notch condition?
  2. What processes are they using to do this and how could they affect margins?
  3. How is the company branding their rentals? Are they ensuring that the consumer feels like the items are upmarket, clean, and durable? Or does the branding and imagery give a poor connotation of the quality?
  4. What logistical processes do the companies have in place? Do they seem good enough to successfully rent out their items and scaleable over time? Is the team known for their logistic expertise?
  5. What is the turnaround time for each items that gets rented when it comes back to the warehouse? Is the brand extracting enough value from each piece?
  6. Has the company built a community of people that care about the items they are renting and are inclined to respect the quality of the pieces?

Real Estate Investors

  1. How could you fill existing vacancies with rental-based stores and fulfillment centers?
  2. How could renting, which shoppers interact with much more frequently than normal transactional buying, boost both the amount and frequency of foot traffic?
  3. If tenants offered renting, how could you make the experience easier for shoppers by integrating parking, drop off and pickup?
  4. What additional infrastructure do you need to make renting possible for your tenants?
  5. Are there ways to bundle existing commercial square footage for renting operations alongside retail square footage to give companies the infrastructure they need to make renting a success?
  6. Could some of this infrastructure be shared among multiple tenants or a competitive advantage to attack new tenants?


Dialogue — Sample Work

Dialogue Example

Exclusive private dinners every month full of energizing and provocative conversation with 8-12 peers.


Dialogue III

How sustainable is paid customer acquisition on Facebook, Google and Amazon?

A thought-provoking discussion about the existential future of paid marketing on the big three platforms and what comes next.

7pm at Bar Bolonat

10 seats

RSVP — LooseThreadsIntel.com/rsvp

Dialogue V

How can companies take advantage of the rental economy?

A thought-provoking discussion about how renting, not buying, might be one of the biggest economic opportunities.

7pm at Fedora

10 seats

RSVP — LooseThreadsIntel.com/rsvp