Robin Lewis

About Robin Lewis

Robin Lewis has over forty years of strategic operating and consulting experience in the retail and related consumer products industries. He has held executive positions at DuPont, VF Corporation, Women’s Wear Daily (WWD), and Goldman Sachs, among others, and has consulted for dozens of retail, consumer products and other companies. In addition to his role as CEO and Editorial Director of The Robin Report, he is a professor at the Graduate School of Professional Studies at The Fashion Institute of Technology.

Disruption Dysfunction

iStock_000034006880LargeThe Harvard Business School may have a different answer, but here’s my definition of a Disrupter:

The guy who comes into your market and screws up your business by doing something different.

While Disruption, Disrupters and the entire Disrupt Movement have gone to the front pages of the business section the past 18 months, when you think about it, they have been constants in retailing since…well, since the first general store replaced the peddler’s cart. After all, didn’t the first generation of department stores – John Wanamaker and others – disrupt the retail world of specialty stores? Half a century later, the first discount stores of New England disrupted the department store channel, forever changing their business models. Big box category killers, superstore national chains, even Apple stores: they all disrupted what had been going on before they showed up on the scene.

Which of course brings us to today and the disrupter du jour: the Internet, of course. Perhaps it truly is the mother of all disrupters, changing the rules the way none of its predecessors ever did. Certainly, it seems that way to those of us who have no life and are consumed with the ever-changing nature of the retailing business.

But there’s disruption and then there’s disruption, and nobody can quite come to a clear agreement on which is which.

Dyson DC33 Multi Floor Upright Vacuum CleanerA Chinese Fortune, Cookie

Take the recent coverage of Alibaba – the huge Chinese online business that seems to be a combination of Amazon, Google and a Monopoly game – when it announced it was going public. Two New York Times stories couldn’t quite decide if Alibaba and its czar Jack Ma were disrupters or not. Consider this description from one of the two stories that ran on the same page on the day of the big deal:

“He (Ma) has also proved to be a serial disrupter – an outsider with a knack for creating new markets by reimaging old industries like retailing and finance.”

Contrast that with this next story: “Alibaba’s IPO filing breaks with that well-worn theme. Instead of     promising to disrupt an existing market, the Chinese e-commerce giant wants do something more straightforward, but potentially far more lucrative.”

So, disrupter or not? If the Times can’t figure it out, what chance do us mere mortals have?

Disrupters Clean House

Maybe you read Luke Williams’ 2011 book, Disrupt, which no doubt helped create the entire disruption disruption. Williams provides a classic home products example of what disruption is all about: the Swiffer mop. The basic premise with a mop is that it uses water to clean. But sometimes too much water retards the cleaning process. So what happens if you come up with something that cleans but doesn’t use water at all?

Presto, the Swiffer.

Presto, disruption.

The home furnishings business – never a hotbed for cutting-edge anything – has nonetheless had its share of disrupters…barely. Consider the Dyson vacuum cleaner. When it came out in the American market a decade ago, the average selling price of a better vac was about a hundred bucks, maybe $125. Hoover was the best-selling brand and the headlight was probably the biggest advancement in technology of the previous 20 years. James Dyson came along with a machine with advanced (though not totally original) technology, a huge advertising budget and a $400 price tag. Eighteen months later the Dyson was the number one selling machine in the business by dollars and another year or two later, it was number one in units too.

The other vacuum suppliers were not only disrupted, they were sucked dry.

A more recent poster child following the same path is the Nest thermostat. Talk about a product that virtually nobody was paying any attention to! Enter some guys who used to work for Apple with the classic Steve Jobs approach: design a gorgeous product that addresses an underserved category and, oh by the way, charge a lot of money for it. How much did Nest disrupt the home thermostat business? About three billion ways, which is how many dollars Google paid for the company this past January.

Does Domino Know?

Home disruption is also occurring on the retail side. Take a look at Domino magazine. Once the darling of the Gen X set for its irreverent takes on decorating, the publication was a Great Recession victim when owner Conde Nast shut it down in 2009 after just three years. An online version was maintained and there were some one-shots of repackaged content but it wasn’t the same. Late last year Domino Redux debuted, once again under the leadership of its original publisher Beth Brenner, now reinventing herself as chief revenue officer. As an online-only product that planned a print companion down the road, it set out to chase the holy grail of media convergence: read about products and decorating items and then buy those very same things right through the magazine. The old Domino sent you to someone to buy what it featured on its pages. Domino the sequel is cutting out the middleman.

Is it working? It’s too early to tell. But in a world where the line between journalism and commerce is increasingly not just fuzzy but often erased, Domino is certainly out to disrupt the way things have been done in both fields.

Then there’s Crane & Canopy. Started by husband and wife Harvard Business School classmates, this disrupter is trying to turn the business of buying bedding upside down. Right now most of the things you buy to put on your bed – sheets, pillowcases, comforters, duvets, what-have-you, are made by Asian suppliers, most often in China. American importers bring the product in and sell it to retailers. It’s the way it works, whether it’s Bloomingdale’s or Family Dollar…or Amazon.

Crane & Canopy is trying something different. Working directly with Chinese factories, it is designing its own products and then selling them directly to consumers online. Its products are not sold in any stores and are only available on the company’s own site. And by streamlining the sourcing model, it controls the process virtually from start to finish while shaving some costs out of the process. Again, this is another disruption in process. Whether Crane & Canopy can do the volume necessary to sustain its model is the 64-Yuan question.

As with any good disruption, the reaction of those being disrupted is mixed. In the case of Dyson, Hoover, Eureka and all the rest of the established vacuum cleaner market, it is still struggling to catch up. They were clearly caught with their dust busters down and Dyson continues to set the pace.

Nest has certainly shaken up its temperature-controlled market segment, as evidenced by a new Honeywell thermostat now coming to market that is voice activated. But you have to doubt that Google’s checkbook is out for that item.

And neither the new Domino nor Crane & Canopy have anywhere near the scale to make House Beautiful or Bed Bath & Beyond feel threatened. At least, not yet. But I guess that’s the way disruption works. You don’t realize until it’s too late that someone has come in and screwed up your business.

Warren Shoulberg is editorial director for several Progressive Business Media publications in the home furnishings field and could currently stand a little less disruption in his life, thank-you.

Apple Addicts Still Mainline Steve Jobs

X Japan Wax Figure UnveilingExcerpted from the New, New Rules of Retail
By Robin Lewis and Michael Dart

On January 9, 2007, on a big stage at the Macworld convention at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, Steve Jobs unveiled the first iPhone. With the already unprecedented cult following of Apple—and for that matter, of Jobs himself—this would be the first of many launches that would further fuel one of the most powerful brand-consumer connections ever.

This unveiling, of course, was merely the warm-up. Steve Jobs’ grandly staged presentation would trigger an intense anticipation among Apple “addicts” that would be satisfied only by the actual sales release of the iPhone itself.

This would happen at 6:00 PM local time on June 29, 2007, as the doors opened at Apple Stores nationwide to welcome hundreds of cult followers anticipating their fix, so to speak. Some media sources at the time were dubbing the iPhone the “Jesus phone.” In fact, in New York City the line started forming twelve hours before Apple’s flagship store opened and ended up winding around two city blocks, or roughly a quarter mile, with more than a thousand avid cultists in it. Some had even camped out overnight. Obviously the Apple addicts had learned that if they wanted the new phone, they had better be present when that door opened, or be forced to wait for weeks.

Apple’s connection with its consumers has gone way beyond the simply emotional. It has succeeded by actually connecting with their minds. In our updated second edition of The New Rules of Retail, released on August 12, 2014, we called this neurological connectivity. [Read more...]

Whole Foods Market: Conscious Capitalism or Unconscious Greed?

wholefoods_webSo are we adding a luxury food brand to the “designer derby” of racers seeking more growth (for its own sake) by reaching down to consumers who are reaching up? Or is the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, spreading his high-end food among the masses at prices they can afford, simply out of the goodness of his democratic heart? I’m speaking of the Whole Foods launch of pilot stores in more down-tier areas of Detroit, New Orleans and Chicago’s South Side. And about this strategy, Mackey made this rather magnanimous and altruistic statement: “For every penny we cut off the price, we reach more people who can afford to shop with us.”

What a wonderful thing to say. And, what a wonderful thing to do for the less well-heeled people living where the stores are being launched. And I suppose it will be a wonderful thing for new growth, at least for the foreseeable future. [Read more...]

Q/A with William P. Lauder

William_Lauder-1We sat down with William P. Lauder, Chairman of The Estée Lauder Companies, the $10 billion global beauty juggernaut, and talked about the evolving retail landscape, the importance of knowing your consumer and the opportunities and challenges of globalization.

Robin: William, we’re living in what we believe is the biggest transformation of the industry in the history of retailing, and therefore in wholesaling and branding as well. Some CEOs are saying it feels like the Wild West. Others feel like they are living in the chaos of technology that is far ahead of our capabilities to totally understand and use it.

And here is The Estée Lauder Companies, the undisputed leader in their space, right in the middle of it all. You served as CEO from 2004-2009, when you transitioned to your current role as Executive Chairman. During these ten years, the business has nearly doubled. So, I know you’re really smart, but is there also a bit of luck working here as well?

William: When I first joined this company in 1986, I perceived that my mission was to gain the experience to do what we needed to help the company be at the forefront of prestige aspirational beauty around the world. In 1996, more than half of our business was in North America. Now more than half our business is outside of North America. Emerging markets like China and Russia were very important, and we had a low share of market in those countries as well as in Europe, the UK and elsewhere. So, we saw a greater global opportunity where the pie was expanding, as opposed to our huge share of the US pie, which was static. [Read more...]

Amazon: Trouble in River City?

Or Wall Street’s Magical Leprechaun

Amazon Unveils Its First SmartphoneJeff Bezos does have that “Leprechaunish” look about him. Wall Street certainly bought into the fable that Mr. Bezos (symbolically toiling over his “shoe making”) would deliver a pot of gold at the end of some yet to be defined rainbow. For 17 years, the Street has believed in his magic ever since he wrote in his SEC filing in 1997: “The Company believes that it will incur substantial operating losses for the foreseeable future, and that the rate at which such losses will be incurred will increase significant from current levels.” He also stated that he wouldn’t run the company to make profits, rather he would pour investment into growing the business to “get big fast.” Wall Street took a deep breath and bought into his strategy, hook, line and sinker. The Street believed that at some unknown distant point in time, and at the end of some rainbow, the Leprechaun would magically deliver his pot of gold.

Well, talk about “substantial operating losses” (which Amazon has lived up to for these past 17 years), this recent second quarter earnings report, revealing a net loss of $126 million, takes the cake. Worse, Amazon rather flippantly, with no explanation as to why, says it will lose between $410 and $810 million in the current quarter. Pot of gold? It’s more like a pot of coal. [Read more...]

Dov Charney is a Joke: A Dirty Joke and a Business Joke

Dov Charney, Portfolio, November 1, 2008The media at large has publicly exposed enough of the “dirty” part of this “jokester” that I don’t need to pile on more. Although it might be a more titillating read to add more dirt to the pile, I’ll just sign off on his disgusting behavior during his tenure as CEO of American Apparel by saying it’s equally disgusting to me that the board didn’t kick his butt out of there a long time ago. It never ceases to amaze me that too many boards are still weak on proper governance in protecting the shareholders from the egregious, deleterious behavior of miscreant CEO’s. And American Apparel’s board seems to be one of those.

But for the moment, let’s forget about Charney’s sexual proclivities, including allegations of abuse. Many top executives have been caught with their pants down, so to speak, albeit not all as flagrantly as Charney. Many were fired, yet many others have just had their dalliances swept under the rug.

Charney’s real dirty joke is that he is a business joke of the tallest order. [Read more...]

The Coming Crash of Michael Kors…Take it To The Bank

MK_Blog_graphic-01Michael Kors, the brand, is becoming ubiquitous, and that’s the kiss of death for trendy fashion brands, particularly those positioned in the up-market younger consumer sectors. Its distribution is racing towards ubiquity, wholesale and retail (online, its own stores, outlet stores and internationally). Even worse, a rocket-propelled accelerant to ubiquity is its expansion into multiple product categories and sub-brands, so they can compete at all price points. Some would argue all of those segments will simply end up competing with each other, thus cannibalizing the top end of the spectrum. [Read more...]

Go Disrupt Yourself!

Panel logosSo Says a Disruptive Seminar Panel

Please don’t take offense. “Go disrupt yourself” is not a euphemism for that other, often used R-rated suggestion. This is a serious directive for so-called disrupters themselves, as well as for all businesses operating traditional models who incorrectly believe disruption is defined only by fundamentally new models or game-changing concepts. Today’s disrupters are typically spun out of the thin air of “Siliconville,” which often define them as tech-driven and Internet enabled.

This not-so-clear concept of self-disruption was one of the major points that I filtered out of the spirited panel discussion at the recent Robin Report and Fashion Group International forum, “Disrupters vs. Disruptees.” And I believe with some elaboration, the conversation is highly instructive for both upstarts and traditional businesses.

The forum presented a panel of “Disruptive” CEO’s including Warby Parker (Neil Blumenthal), Rent the Runway (Jennifer Hyman), and Shapeways 3D printers (Peter Weijmarhausen). These new kids on the block had a robust discussion with the “Disruptee” CEOs of HSNi (Mindy Grossman) and The Ascena Retail Group (David Jaffe), whose portfolio consists of Lane Bryant, Dress Barn, Catherine’s Justice’s and Maurice’s. Paul Charron, former CEO of Liz Claiborne and Chairman of Campbell Soup was our moderator. Yours truly set the tone with an overview of the principles and perils of disruption.

2014_Retail_Disrupters_012Upon reflection, it occurs to me that since most of the au courant disruptive new business models are really just new marketing concepts made possible by the tools of technology and the Internet — they can be knocked off in a nanosecond. Both Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos understood this from day one at Apple and Amazon. Their mantras, “the next big thing” and “get big fast,” respectively, were loud and clear marching orders for self-disruption, day in and day out. Whether breakthrough new products from Apple, or entirely new marketplaces from Amazon, implicit to their vision is to preempt copycats by becoming so big, so fast, that knock-off artists would find it nearly impossible to catch up.

Self-disruption and rapid preemptive growth require two ingredients: perpetual innovation into new product or market spaces and huge capital investments to fuel such growth. While these two legendary examples of continuing marketplace disruption are obvious by their success, it was largely due to the tenacity and audacity of their visionary leaders as “first-movers” who leveraged technology and the Internet to catapult their product and marketing ideas into dominant positions.

Many early movers later, we are now witnessing a deluge of innovative ideas (some more disruptive than others), still facilitated by technology and the Internet. In fact, many of them, including Warby Parker and Rent The Runway, were launched on the Internet.

2014_Retail_Disrupters_021The continuing challenge of all disrupters is to be the de facto, sustainable solution with new product innovation and distribution. They will need to continue to dominate market share from competitors. And the hugest threat of all is that the giant traditional companies can easily copy these upstarts and have the financial clout to steal and own the space.

With the ease of entry into this technological and Internet-based space, another challenge facing these “later movers,” so to speak, is that their fundamental value propositions are easy to copy. For Warby Parker, the model is making and selling trendy eyewear online (and now in stores) for low prices. Their charitable program donating glasses to kids in need hits spot-on with Millennials’ sense of social justice. The fundamental proposition for Rent The Runway is renting apparel, and they have found themselves in the dry cleaning business along the way to ensure that their quick turnaround rentals are guaranteed clean. In Warby Parker’s brilliantly conceived, innovative eyewear space, there are now several copycats: Classic Specs; Eyebobs; Lookmatic; Mezzmer; and Made Eyewear — offering frames, sunglasses and readers. Likewise, the world that Rent The Runway launched has some wannabes, including Lending Luxury, Girl Meets Dress (in the UKL, and Wish Want Wear.

2014_Retail_Disrupters_050It’s important to note that while these may be copies of the core value proposition of Warby Parker and Rent The Runway, they are not necessarily marketing the model and delivering it in precisely the same way. How these models are executed of course, will determine their success or failure. Nevertheless, the copycats did enter the same space pioneered by these two initial disrupters. Such is the compliment and challenge of innovators.

Shapeways, while not the creator of 3D printing technology (earliest versions launched in the 1980s), they also face a different challenge. Shapeways 3D printing is on an industrial scale (unlike MakerBot home 3D printing) and is still in pursuit of a scaled-up market to serve. They are ahead of their time in the sense that the potential of 3D printing to disintermediate the accessories business, for example, is still nascent.

A major point to be made is that the three Disrupter panelists are faced with the almost daily challenge of stealing market share in their categories and sustaining growth. They must also understand the concept of self-disruption as envisioned by two of the most powerful disrupters of our time: Jobs and Bezos. They must be relentless in churning out the “next big thing” and to “get big fast” (now more difficult among a sea of knock-offs). Each of these young CEOs seem determined to do so.

2014_Retail_Disrupters_059Have We Over-Glamorized Marketing 101?

Now step back for a second and reflect on these business concepts. Are today’s winning principles any different than they have ever been? You innovate and come up with a new product or service or retail concept that targets a segment of consumers who need or want your offering and the way in which you provide it. You then brand the business and invest heavily in marketing it for growth. And you keep innovating new ideas into your model to continually add value to keep your existing customer loyal and to entice new customers.

Today the only difference and change from the past are the full-on advancements of technology, the Internet, and the all-enabling smartphone. However, they are simply tools to achieve a greater understanding of, and connection with, consumers and provide more efficient and effective marketing and distribution. These tools are only as useful as the human minds that envision their optimal capabilities for their specific business models: Jobs, Bezos and hopefully our three Disrupter panelists leading the perpetual stream of new upstarts.

So are the Traditional Giant Brands and Retailers “Chopped Liver?”

In closing, I’m sorry to have to break it to many of these young upstarts that while they may be disruptive in the way they are using the new tools, those same tools are available to the 800- pound gorilla brands and retailers that are already big, some in fact, enormous. And as traditional retailers wake up one morning to understand how to use those same tools, they won’t be disrupters, they will be serial destructors.

And of course our other two panelists were anything but “chopped liver,” comfortably reinventing self-disruption, perfecting and maximizing the use of the technology and Internet tools, and reframing their business models. HSNi and the Ascena Retail Group are both multi-billion dollar businesses that got huge over time and are now envisioning how to get bigger faster by seamlessly integrating their enormously complex business models with the Internet and all of the advanced operating and information technologies available. And guess what? They don’t have to lurch from one round of funding to another.

Talk about self-disruption. Mindy Grossman commented: “In the past eight years we have disrupted our business model at least four times. We created a culture where risk-taking is encouraged and failing fast is encouraged too.” HSNi has an advanced innovation group tasked with finding the next big thing., They disrupt the status quo and innovate reflecting changes in consumer behavior, tasked with primarily raising whatever bar necessary to provide a boundary-less shopping experience, wherever, whenever and however the consumer wants it.

David Jaffe, with about 4000 stores under five nameplates, is also using the new tools to seamlessly integrate the omnichannel concept and to provide shopping interchangeability both online and off. He closed by saying: “We believe the convenience and sociability of shopping gives us a head start over the Internet startups.”

Indeed, there is great truth in that statement as Warby Parker, Rent The Runway and many other e-commerce startups are now opening physical stores. Apple, of course, understood the synergy long ago.

So, the great news for all of commerce is the tsunami of young entrepreneurs who understand how to use the new technologies and the Internet to create disruptive and innovative ways to engage and delight consumers and to integrate operational systems to more efficiently and effectively market and distribute their value.

The challenge and tough news for these entrepreneurs is three-fold: first, self-disrupt with a continual innovation process; second, build a management and operational infrastructure for sustainable growth; and, finally, invest heavily to “get big fast.”

A final ironic twist may very well be that while the young upstarts, as well as Amazon, Apple and others disrupt the market with innovative ways to use the new tools, the world of billion dollar legacy brands and big retailers may end up being the real copycats. And if I were Warby Parker, I would not want Luxottica as a copycat. If I were Amazon, I would not want Walmart knocking me off.

It could all end badly, more like a knock-out.

Malls are the New Anchors…

Robin_Mall_blog_finalAnd the Internet is not the Only Culprit

A lot has been written and spoken recently about dying malls, my participation included. Well, here’s another one. In the middle of this protracted conversation, I discovered an interesting irony. As originally defined, the term, “mall anchor,” is now an oxymoron. Major retailers defined by mall and shopping center owners as “anchors” for their ability to generate traffic, now feel as though they are literally anchored to the mall, not able to cut loose as its Titanic-like host is going under. So the term “mall anchor” has now converged figuratively and literally.

With the exception of a hundred or so A malls, the B, C, and D malls are learning the hard way what they should have anticipated and acted upon a decade ago. Instead of the heavy dependence on their anchors for generating traffic and profitable growth, mall developers should have realized that nothing stays the same forever. As the Internet loomed larger by the minute, it didn’t require a rocket scientist to predict that technology would drive a fundamental transformation across the entire industry and threaten to the very existence of retailing, as we knew it.

With every mall and store in the world resting comfortably in consumers’ pockets or in their living rooms, who needs to spend the time and effort to actually go to, and shop through the mall when they can let their fingers do the walking and can shop virtually for an unlimited selection in a matter of minutes? All while sipping coffee.

Had mall owners foreseen the devastating plunge in traffic and the waning drawing power of their anchors, they would have proactively collaborated with their tenants to come up with a strategic transformation to unshackle from the anchor model. However, they didn’t. Therefore anchor positions have become an albatross around the necks of both successful retail anchors who now want a more compelling location, and the failing anchor stores who just want to get the hell out.

The Internet is Not the Only Culprit

While the Internet, rocket-fueled by the smartphone, has been the big disrupter, many malls have become irrelevant aided and abetted by three other major drivers:

1. Millennials Are Replacing Boomers as the Largest Consumer Segment

Aging Boomers, the largest consumer group ever, are retiring or starting to die off. And those among the living are downsizing, trading big homes for smaller ones, or renting in urban areas where they find more freedom in less burdensome and maintenance free apartment living. They just don’t need or want more stuff. “Stuff” expenditures for this group are now being transferred to purchasing experiential travel, leisure, and entertainment, as well as health and wellness. The Great Recession has changed shopping behavior, and whatever lesser amounts Boomers are still spending on stuff is being spent more online as opposed to a fatiguing and annoying trip to the local mall.

Millennials, who are replacing the Boomers to become the largest consumer segment (projected to account for about 30% of all retail sales by 2020), are also shaping a different lifestyle. Currently about 80% of the US population lives in urban areas. That number is growing due to Millennials preference for urban living, further influenced by the fact that many cannot afford to buy a home. Some are burdened with paying down school loans, and many of them still struggling to find decent paying jobs commensurate with their college-grad degrees. So renting an apartment is more often than not, their only choice.

Other lifestyle characteristics of this generation do not bode well for the future of massive suburban malls and shopping centers. Less is more for Millennials, and quality of lifestyle is desirable over big quantities of everything. Smaller, intimate and interesting environments trump giant stores and massive choice. High-tech and even higher-touch experiences are requisites. Ostentation is eschewed for the understated. Special-just-for-me, highly personalized brands beat out over-exposed badges of luxury. And social gathering places don’t always need physical spaces. But when they do, these places are not going to be impersonal, mega-scaled shopping centers.

Millennials are shopping differently, largely due to the fact that they were born into, and are using the full empowerment of the Internet and technology. They continue to accelerate their use of the Internet, fueling its double-digit growth rates. Therefore the shopping mall, unless it has a compelling enough reason for these young people to hang out, is being replaced by local grass-roots gathering places where the Next Gen can be with their friends to shop as well as work on their personal projects assisted by their smartphones and MacBook Airs. Mall-based teen specialty brands are struggling because they haven’t changed their models and store designs accordingly.

On the other hand, if Millennial shoppers do seek a more mall-type experience, they prefer clusters of smaller, freestanding stores in local neighborhoods or in mixed-use “village lifestyle centers.” These new public plazas offer a more compelling social and community experience, with streets of shops, outdoor cafes, restaurants, movie theatres, bakeries, and the like. Developers are keyed into this seismic shift, as many of these villages are designed with offices or apartments located above the shops.

2. Cash-Strained, Lower Income Consumers

The rich are getting richer. The A malls that largely cater to them will likely survive, although, they too, must elevate the shopping experience. However, many of the B, C and D malls catering to lower income consumers, many of whom are getting poorer, will either close altogether or be repurposed as walk-in medical clinics, health and wellness centers, video game complexes, movie theatres, etc. These cash strained consumers are reducing the number of visits to the mall to save on gas. At the same time, the dollar stores opened thousands of small, freestanding stores in lower income neighborhoods, more accessible and convenient for these paycheck-to-paycheck shoppers. Furthermore, Amazon offering rock bottom prices on just about everything, has stolen huge share of market from all the brick-and-mortar discounters serving this segment.

To throw more fuel on the fire that’s burning up mall traffic, both Walmart and Target are fighting back to regain some of their market share moving away from the mall and accelerating their small-store neighborhood strategies to compete with the dollar and convenience stores. The big-box guys are also aggressively increasing their omnichannel capabilities to better compete with Amazon.

Two other culprits are JC Penney and Sears. They are anchor tenants in roughly half of the mainstream US malls. The tale of these two retailers is not a happy one. JCP is struggling to right its ship after losing roughly a third of its business, which will require them to close many of those mall locations. Sear’s tale is one of a slow and painful death (in my opinion), which means they will ultimately close or sell the locations they own. Whatever small amount of traffic these former giants are still generating for the malls will continue to decline.

3. Outlet Malls On Fire

As retailers from luxury to mainstream continue in the value race to the bottom, in which price has become the weapon of choice, outlet stores are actually just another ruse to discount. Since the overhead for running these operations is much lower than full-line stores, the opportunity for faster and more profitable growth is intoxicating for all retailers who have been drastically slashing prices in their full-line stores, thus decimating margins.
Saks Off Fifth, Nordstrom Rack, Bloomingdale’s The Outlet Store, and Neiman-Marcus Last Call are all aggressively opening new outlet stores while they have few, if any new full-line openings planned. Even mainstream Macy’s is opening an outlet, and will probably find that it’s a highly-effective distribution channel for new growth. Just by example, upscale Coach generates 70% of total revenues from their outlet stores. Chico’s, Gap, even J Crew, are all opening more outlet stores, along with many others.

Of course, the elephant in the room is how this type of discounting is going to have on the credibility of the brands over the long term.

What’s an Anchor to Do?

If you happen to be a retailer “anchoring” dying malls, you need to determine how you can get the heck out of there without paying huge penalties. Then craft a new, smaller neighborhood store strategy that can be freestanding or as a part of one of the new lifestyle “villages” mentioned earlier.

And if you’re one of the dying mall owners, you have to figure out how to repurpose your space or simply close it down entirely. If you do, please take it down with the wrecking ball. These abandoned malls with their piles of cracking cement, broken windows, and huge empty parking lots, are horrible blights that devalue the whole area.

Repurposing examples abound. A laundry list of ideas: walk-in medical clinics, health and wellness centers, video game complexes, bigger Cineplex theaters with more Imax screens, university extension schools, 3D printing centers, gun ranges, aquariums, gyms, go-cart tracks, maker faires, community theatres, bowling alleys, day-care facilities, indoor parks, community centers and churches. And a huge opportunity; conversions to ethnic, culturally thematic malls such as the Fiesta Mall in Atlanta, totally focusing on Latino customers and all of the things they enjoy as they spend the day shopping with their families.

So the message to the anchor-store mall owners or anchor-retailers, un-anchor yourselves and embrace the revolution. Disrupt yourselves and “bite the bullet” on whatever financial hit you must take to change your business model. Quickly. As they say, “sink or swim.”

Don’t Overestimate or Misunderstand “Disruption”

DISRUPTIVE-INNOVATION_rdRemember the phrase “innovate or die?” Well, it died. Taking its place today is “disrupt or die.”

Disrupt this, disrupt that. We’re in the throes of it. As I write, another disruptive concept is being born. And if you don’t see it coming and don’t adopt or adapt to it, you may get mowed down in its path. In fact, the true winners are disrupting and transforming themselves before an outside disrupter gets to them. The chic label of disruption aside, I would argue that innovation and disruption could be synonymous in their commercial results.

It’s all happening fast, faster, and like a pinwheel, and still accelerating in a whirling blur. It’s a new liftoff every day, rocket-fueled by venture capitalists that have invested close to $30 billion in 2013, a 7% increase over 2012. So if you’re in the game, don’t find yourself standing still on the launch pad. Get a blast on it.

The perpetrators of much of this disruption are 20- and 30-somethings, many of them now nearly-overnight billionaires. And by the way, do you remember the term “burn rate,” before the dot.com crash (how much cash one would burn through in a month)? It was the measure of success. Now the badge of honor is the “round of funding” one is on. I guess in the end, it’s pretty much the same thing. Just ask veterans Jeff Bezos, the Google boys, and Mark Zuckerberg — and new darlings, Brian Acton and Jan Koum

So What is Disruption?

One handy definition of these disrupters comes from us — our columnist for The Robin Report, Warren Shoulberg. In our upcoming print issue Warren says a disrupter is “the guy who comes into your market and screws up your business by doing something different.” That works for me.

However, “doing something different,” can “screw” up your business or market in three different ways. Furthermore, most of the disruption or innovation we see today is due to the technology era, including the Internet, providing the new tools for disruption. Note I said “tools,” precisely because that’s all they are — tools to facilitate innovative or disruptive ideas.

And this technology era is now in its third retail iteration: first, its boost to efficiency and speed from factory floor to the warehouse; second, from the warehouse to the store; and, now, in its final iteration, with the smartphone as its accelerant. The Internet and technology are driving the part of the value chain that connects with the consumer with incredible, fundamentally game-changing and disruptive new ways that also empower them with unlimited and instantaneous access to whatever, wherever, whenever and however, their little hearts desire.

So, what are the three levels of disruptive intensity that are meant to “screw up” your business or market?

First is an incremental innovation, which some would argue is not really a disruption. Lululemon, Whole Foods, and Gilt Groupe, in my opinion, are incremental innovations. They are easily knocked off, which we have seen happening more than once. How long it takes to “copycat” the model varies. But while they are dominating the new space, they have first-mover pricing power, until of course, competition enters and that power gets leveled.

The second and third disruptive levels consist of fundamental innovations, either changing the game, or creating a whole new game. These disrupters are not easily copied. Starbuck’s changed the coffee shop model and consumers’ behavior along with it. Facebook created a whole new game, as did Twitter. Uber is changing the taxi model as Amazon changed the game of distribution. Since they are all ultimately able to be duplicated by other clever entrepreneurs, only time will tell if these icons will have the sustainable dominance to have created a whole new game in which new competitors may enter later, but will never share the number-one space.

Speed rules in this disruption game. Why do you think Jeff Bezos’ mantra from “Day One” as he called it, has been “get big fast,” and he has built on that mantra every year to get big faster. And we all know he has a complicit Wall Street behind him, willing to go along with his top line “get bigger faster” mantra at the expense of making nothing on the bottom line.

I believe a lot of the disrupters in tech world, many with truly unbelievable valuations, are benefiting from an Amazon-like growth strategy — to say nothing of round after round of insatiable funding. The challenges are enormous for last century’s business models to adopt and adapt technology and the Internet as tools to disrupt themselves to achieve the new century’s measures of success, all without Wall Street’s complicity.

However, if a business sees “disruption” coming their way, they can avoid being “screwed up,” or worse, decimated, by acting fast and embracing whatever the disruption is that’s headed for their space. Furthermore, in many cases, “disruptees” may very well gain a competitive advantage by adopting disruptive concepts that fit their models and leveraging these innovations to their already powerful brand and customer base. And watch out! They have the potential to turn around and disrupt the original disruptor. And so it goes in the never-ending spiral of disruptive innovation.

At the end of the day, if we are not creating new today, we will be gone tomorrow.

The “Great Disruption”

Finally, the “Great Disruption” is yet to come. At some point along the way, retail and wholesale models will cease to exist (along with their increasingly irrelevant terms), as technology will enable goods and services to be seamlessly and instantaneously transferred from creator to consumer. And in another wave of disruption, creator and consumer may just be the same person.

Join Robin and Fashion Group International for a Special Event!

Join Robin Lewis and Fashion Group International for a highly-provocative interactive conversation that pits the new kids on the block against the titans of the retail industry. Hear what the Disrupters are doing to shake up their sectors, and how the Disruptees saw it coming and are on top of new technology, big data and integrated networks.

 fgi_logo

disrupt

Retail Symposium

June 20, 2014 – 8AM – 10AM

The New York Hilton
1335 Avenue of the Americas, New York

Introduction by
Robin Lewis – CEO, The Robin Report

Moderator:
Paul Charron – Chairman of the Board, Campbell Soup,
former CEO Liz Claiborne

PANELISTS

DISRUPTERS:

Neil Blumenthal – Founder and CEO Warby Parker
Peter Weijmarshausen – CEO ShapeWays 3D Printers
Jennifer Hyman – CEO/Founder Rent the Runway

DISRUPTEES:

Mindy Grossman – CEO HSN
David Jaffe – CEO Ascena Retail Group (Lane Bryant, Dress Barn,
Maurice’s, Justice’s and Catherine’s)

Register Now to Save Your Spot!
Limited Space Available

Sponsored by:

sponsors

 

Angela Ahrendts – An Apple Disruptor or One-Off Burberry Rock Star?

AhrendtsI believe former Burberry CEO, Angela Ahrendts, did in fact disrupt the traditional department store model, specifically through her seamless and spectacular integration of the Internet and technology. Indeed, when one steps into Burberry’s London flagship, it’s like stepping into a technological extravaganza, taking “high-tech, high-touch” to another level, empowering consumers and providing an awesome shopping experience. And upon entering and shopping the website, one has an identical experience, however without the 3-D physical sensation. Burberry’s website states its mission as “seamlessly blurring physical and digital worlds.” Lauded on both sides of the pond as some kind of rock star, Ahrendts caught the attention of Apple CEO Tim Cook, who lured her to head up Apple’s retail business.

Now, everybody is wondering what she’s going to be doing in her new role. And that’s no small question as she sits in the enchanted land of “the next big thing.” Apple already disrupted the world of retailing when it launched its stores under Steve Jobs in 2001. Currently, with over 400 stores worldwide, it’s still the most productive retail space in the world, in all of history, averaging over $5000 per square foot. So the first question one might ask is: why on earth would Apple want to disrupt such incredible performance? Secondly, if that is what is expected of Ms. Ahrendts, how would she disrupt it? [Read more...]