Greg Steinhafel, the CEO of Target Corporation, and Ron
Johnson, the head of JC Penney, have both made very public appeals to
branded manufacturers: We need your help as our suppliers to fight back against
consumer showrooming.
Showrooming is
something most of us do, at least occasionally. Whether it’s at a mass merchant
giant like Target or my little book store in town, we walk in, check out the
merchandise, ask questions, and leave this “showroom” to buy at a lower price
somewhere else, most likely on-line. The spread of mobile-shopping apps makes showrooming
brick-and-mortar stores even easier, and even more prevalent.
In a recent Bloomberg article I made the same
plea as Messrs. Steinhafel and Johnson but with this difference: Please, I
asked the brand makers, do this for your
own good. If you don’t, if you let your best distribution partners be
killed off, your business will eventually die too. Quality producers need
high-touch retail in order for customers to experience and understand their
superiority. On-line can be good in its way, but it is not the way consumers
most need. Seeing, touching, trying on in person, we need these means of
evaluating before we buy. Or we don’t buy. Or we buy something that in the thin
experiential world of the internet seems about just as good, only cheaper and
made by someone else.
Brands seem to view this situation with more schadenfreude
than urgency. And maybe some crocodile tears may be excused. Over the last
couple decades, brands’ channel relationships with retailers have grown
prickly, to say the least. As the balance of market power has shifted to the
Wal-Marts and The Home Depots, mega-retailers have roughed up manufacturers
pretty good. They’ve contracted for off-price me-too’s from China. National
chains have also backward integrated into private label house brands of their
own, in direct competition – I mean adjacent on the shelf – with their main
suppliers. And most damaging to all concerned, they’ve dropped their service
levels. What kind of partnership is this?
But now the chains are hurting, and they’ve extended the
olive branch. Brands would do well to take it.
When Target and Penney’s cry Help! here’s what they mean:
·
Stop
being so passive about distribution. Do your whole job, part of which is
down here at our level working to reach customers through experiences.
·
Make your
channels distinct. Make sure consumers can easily appreciate that they get
something very different when they buy a product in a high-value store and when
they buy it on line or from a discounter.
·
Compensate
each channel for what it does. Stores provide showrooms (for themselves,
not for others). They inventory and display. They advise. They repair. They
promote. Online retailers can be good too. They offer astonishing convenience.
Abundant information. They’re getting better at returns. Etc., etc. Just be
sure each channel’s compensation what it actually does.
·
Ensure
that prices to consumers reflect these cost and value differences. Manufacturers don’t do this! They’re afraid
they’d be breaching antitrust laws about fair and equal pricing. So long as
they go about it in certain, well understood ways, they would not be breaking
the law. Indeed, recent court rulings encourage “resale price maintenance” if
it promotes vigorous competition and consumer welfare.
It’s time for brands to stop viewing retail chains as the
enemy. That war is over. Brands’ challenge for the next decade, at minimum, is
to stop channel-to-channel conflict, while allowing healthy rivalries between
similar competitors within each channel. May the best man win. And may all
channels coexist. We need every one of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment