Umberto Angeloni, ancien CEO de Brioni, CEO de Caruso & créateur de Uman, a accepté de partager sur BrandWatch ses réflexions sur l'avenir des marques de luxe et du retail. Il m'a semblé essentiel, dans cette période où tous célèbrent le retour du "business as usual" et suivent des yeux le redémarrage rapide des ventes des marques de luxe, de revenir à des interrogations importantes - tout particulièrement sur les évolutions fondamentales des attentes des consommateurs dont nous sommes témoins aujourd'hui. Encore faut-il que les marques de luxe s'y intéressent...
“We love questioning. Questioning conventions. Questioning design. Questioning value for money.”
This statement is not by a fashion or luxury brand, it is by Hyundai motor company, in a recent double-page advertisement in the Economist (April 2nd), with no product being shown, just a big white question mark on a blue background [part of the “New Thinking – New Possibilities” campaign].
One quick look at the advertisements currently featured by luxury brands shows quite an opposite perspective – lots of showy product and a flat message of glamour, glitter and gold.
But how can we tell which of the two approaches is the right one, i.e. the one which better resonates with the sentiment of today’s affluent consumers?
I believe that any meaningful discussion about tactics and strategies in an industry, all industries, should begin with a clear vision of the environment we live in – society, culture, science, ethics, beliefs, economics, technology – and how its evolution impacts customers’ behavior. This is especially true today, when so many of said variables are changing, and to such an extent that any practice based on past experience or abstract theory runs the serious risk of being totally irrelevant. Naturally, there is more than one reality co-existing at the same time and in different geographic markets, but there is no denying the fact that we are now collectively living into what has been defined a “Reset World” (1), and that the affluent consumer is much more global than we may suspect.
If one accepts such a scenario, the next step is to start questioning.
The necessity of assuming this radical perspective has already become evident to the more visionary observers and bolder entrepreneurs. Tyler Brulè just published the “Global Rethink Issue” of Monocle, which he opens by saying that: “Sometimes you just know it’s time to go back to the drawing board, to take a fresh look at everything you do. That’s especially true for retailers with tired concepts… and those with the confidence to burst out of the recession with a new look and direction are sure to be on top.” Uman was likewise launched in 2009 with a mission: “to review, re-evaluate or revolutionize, as needed, all the assumptions, rules, rituals, and processes that have been at the basis of the fashion and clothing industry up to now” (2).
I am not an expert in retailing, nor a retailer by profession, and therefore it would be presumptuous of me to provide advice or comment on the mechanics of this industry. However, I do believe that an industry such as fashion and luxury retailing, which deals directly with the most sophisticated consumers, cannot afford to overlook the need to question and evolve. Therefore, what I plan to do with this essay is primarily to raise some questions, and to share my personal sense of energy and urgency towards evolution in our business.
Fashion is supposed to inspire consumers and luxury is expected to enrich their lifestyle, but how can they do so if the companies that create, promote and distribute luxuries do not themselves understand the evolution of consumers’ beliefs, needs, priorities, values? It is ironic that while fashion brands have been on an endless hunt for a “new” customer, it eludes them that he/she is finally here…. clearly, they were just looking for the “next” customer. Whom they now believe to have found in China, and perhaps online.
In terms of distribution, the Brands have definitely stated that they now put all their faith in the DOS model, especially in the mature markets (Europe, Japan, the USA); which means that they will showcase their best and newest products only in their own flagships and official e-commerce sites. Second-tier preferred distribution channels will be the franchises or the joint ventures (still the mono-brand format), especially in the newer markets, which they see as powerful generators of future demand. Outlets and other direct means of distribution (duty-free, catalogs) will complete the company-controlled retail network.
Where does all this leave the so-called “independents”? Having borne more than their share of the downturn, with no help from the brands, some can remain as distributors. Provided they do what they are told – in terms of layouts, minimums, styles, prices, sales. The luckier ones will also be offered construction money, so that they can surrender the best part of their retail space to the control of some brand.
So here comes the first big question. Should the truly independent multi-brand retailers take control of their own destiny and charter a new path? Should they be content to participate in a recovery or should they also attempt to become leaders in a renaissance?
Reading the trade literature and listening to what is being declared at retail summits, it seems that there is little appetite (or courage) for the bolder approach. Actually, typical reactions by retailers so far have been:
- Staying “loyal” to the brands, offering them more space, hoping for their magnanimous support
- Buying “lesser” goods (cheaper and with less quality) as the consumer is deemed wanting to trade down
- Trying overly fancy and sporty items as the classic ones are considered “dead” for the moment
All of this is defensive action, not proactive; driven by anxiety, not by intelligence; contrary to sound wisdom (“always trade up your customer” once taught me Harry Rosen) or past experience (when were brands ever loyal to retailers?). But the main flaw of this “strategy” is the fact that it goes in the wrong direction, i.e. contrary to consumers’ real benefit and inner desire: the consumer wants better prices and better quality. In other words, he wants to trade-up in value. And he is not changing his tastes or sense of style, merely containing his purchases both in a spirit of shijuku (3) as well as to make better decisions.
But let’s assume for argument’s sake that the answer was yes! Then the challenge becomes to defining the “formula” for a seriously evolved multi-brand retail model.
A lot of statistics and advice is made available by the many research firms and consultancies that operate around the retail industry, too often presented as lists of “zeitgeist retail trends” or “global retail insights”, that can be found simply browsing the web. In my experience, they often range from either truisms of the “La Palice” kind, such as: "…hire nice, smart, talented people " (Dionco Inc.), enigmatic statements like … “a store environment needs to be real” (World Retail Congress 2010), or formulaic suggestions, like "… focus on behavioral targeting as a way to drive increased engagement…" (Forrester Research).
Let me clarify that I obviously do recognize the value of investing in superior assets, whether of the technological or human kind, either material or immaterial, and the benefit of constantly improving the quality of a “technique”. Mitchells is a prime example of this in the field of CRM. I am also a believer in analyzing data as the basis for better decision-making and ultimately better performance (4). However, it is my opinion that the current market circumstances require a more holistic and evolutionary approach.
