Target’s brand position: We’re easy

Target is focused on “ease of shopping” as it refines its brand equity. My question (from RetailWire)…is it a credible claim, and can Target really sustain a competitive advantage here? Here’s my comment:

What makes Target “easier” than Walmart or Amazon? It’s a good tagline but is it supported by the facts? Target has a reputation for stockouts and other supply chain issues that a slogan by itself won’t cure. The company has a lot to prove, especially in light of Walmart’s laser focus on the same issue. Case in point: The new Walmart ad where the dad drives through in his PJ’s to pick up breakfast-in-bed fixings.

Did Walmart deserve the punishment?

By “punishment,” I mean the 10% drop in Walmart’s stock price yesterday (February 20) when the company reported slower-than-expected sales and profits in its e-commerce business. My comment at RetailWire expresses a contrary opinion about the market reaction:

Walmart’s stock took a similar hit a few years ago when management decided to investment-spend in the store experience — more payroll in areas like fresh food, remodeling and refixturing as needed, and so on. These were smart strategic choices that weren’t meant to please investors only interested in the latest quarter. Walmart’s decisions at the time have been rewarded with better results ever since.

I look at the 10 percent drop in stock price as a similar overreaction. Walmart is now starting to come up against its own numbers after the Jet.com acquisition, and (more importantly) it’s doing major spending on logistics and marketing to gain omnichannel market share. I’m no stock picker, but maybe this is a buy opportunity …

And now, a Google/Walmart tie-up

To expand on my last post (about Kohl’s and Amazon), now comes word of a stronger alliance between Walmart and Google. Here’s my comment from RetailWire, in which I comment that each company brings specific strengths and weaknesses to the partnership:

When the majority of product searches start at Amazon, that’s a huge advantage — it combines the predictive intelligence of an SEO company with the execution skill of a best-in-class e-tailer. But is Amazon invulnerable? Of course not, and that’s part of the reason why the company is filling in its portfolio with brick-and-mortar acquisitions (Whole Foods) or alliances (Kohl’s).

So an expanded partnership between Walmart and Google has potential: It provides Walmart with more robust search capacity and web traffic, and it offers Google a stronger e-commerce platform. But unless Walmart adds more second-party retailers (and their goods) to its site, it’s not going to catch up to Amazon’s head start for awhile.

Target’s choice: Cheap chic, or just cheap?

A brief RetailWire comment below on Target’s re-pricing of food and commodity basics,  which is something they periodically need to do:

Target periodically needs to reset its prices on commodities because of customers’ nagging perception that it charges too much. This has always been an issue with Walmart as its key competitor, and now Amazon adds to the challenge with its dive into the grocery price wars.

The key to making this work is to drive the higher-margin categories like apparel at the same time. (That’s really the key to the company’s success, not its grocery business.) Target’s reset of its private brands needs to accomplish this goal, otherwise the lower prices on food and household goods will only erode the company’s profitability.

Walmart on a roll?

Walmart’s 2nd quarter results were strong, although their stock price may or may not be rewarded for it in the short term. RetailWire panelists addressed a simple question — is Walmart unstoppable? — and here’s my response:

I would never say “unstoppable,” but Walmart’s strategies in its stores and omnichannel certainly seem to be paying off. They do need to anticipate the impact of the Amazon-Whole Foods tie-up, in terms of its impact on online grocery retailing. But Walmart is seeing payback from its multi-year investments in upgrading brick-and-mortar, focusing on better execution in food, and getting its full-size prototype right

Walmart is the most obvious case of a retailer figuring out how to leverage its e-commerce business into store traffic, but Target’s results seemed to point to the same thing. Even stores like Kohl’s with comp-store decreases suggested 2nd quarter improvements in store traffic — so maybe the stores with the most aggressive omnichannel effort are starting to see results.

How do vendors meet Walmart’s price demands?

From a recent RetailWire discussion…it’s always been challenging for vendors dealing with Walmart, but never more than now when it’s waging war on multiple competitive fronts. Here’s my opinion:

Walmart has always been tough on its suppliers when it comes to costs — it’s part of the company culture. Recall several years ago when suppliers were dealing with escalating cotton costs but Walmart didn’t budge on the prices charged to its customers. And the company is not going to cede its price leadership to Amazon if it can help it.

What can vendors do? As the article suggests, they can try charging more to other customers, they can find cost savings in their supply chains or (the least desirable but most probable outcome) they can compromise product quality.

Can JCP be a player in toys?

JCPenney recently announced an expansion of its toy business, in time for holiday 2017 selling. RetailWire panelists weighed in on the topic, and here’s my take:

Toys are a double-edged sword for softlines retailers like Penney and Kohl’s who want to strengthen their children’s offerings. It’s hard to avoid carrying toys, but it’s also hard to compete against the dominant space of the discounters and big-box stores. (Not to mention the low margins.) Customers have come to expect the best selection and prices from market leaders like Amazon, Walmart and Target.

The broader risk to JCP is that it becomes a “bunch of stuff” with the addition of new categories (from appliances to toys, from bikes to electronics). Just because the store has square footage to burn doesn’t mean that overassortment is a winning long-term play.

Why did Walmart acquire Bonobos?

In case you missed it (among the front-page coverage of Amazon and Whole Foods), Walmart acquired men’s online retailer Bonobos last week. RetailWire panelists weighed in on the pluses and minuses of the move, and here’s my take:

The news about Walmart and Bonobos was overshadowed by the Amazon headline on Friday, and understandably so because of the sheer scope and boldness of the Whole Foods acquisition. But Walmart’s news deserves some attention on its own.

This is another case where Walmart is buying a brand that offers more digital expertise and product development skill than the company appears able to build on its own. But there is a disconnect between Walmart’s brand image and the customers who are shopping Bonobos today. Chances are good that the majority of Whole Foods customers are already Amazon Prime members too. How much overlap exists between Bonobos and Walmart, and will the association with Walmart chase away Bonobos’s most loyal consumers?

Will Target’s latest reset work?

Target’s CEO announced last week that investors should expect tough 2017 returns as the company invests in stores and more competitive pricing. Here’s my recent comment from RetailWire:

Walmart was criticized a couple of years ago for investment spending on its stores because it was likely to put a dent into short-term results. But the long-term view for WMT is brighter because of this decision, and Target is aiming for the same kind of outcome.

But Target has some specific challenges ahead that a store revamp won’t fix on its own:

1. The longstanding conflict between “cheap” and “chic”: Target needs to be more price competitive but has built its brand promise on more aspirational goods;
2. The continuing lack of traction in the grocery business, especially to drive more frequent visits;
3. The head start on e-commerce (and omnichannel) that its biggest competitors already have;
4. The company’s longstanding inability to keep its shelves and pegs filled.

I can’t overstate the importance of the last point. A trip to Target where a third of the shopping list can’t be filled is a waste of time, no matter how compelling or competitive the merchandise might appear.

Is the pendulum swinging back on early Thanksgiving openings?

I’ve argued for awhile that earlier and earlier Black Friday (or Thursday) openings are counterproductive. Here are some recent thoughts posted on RetailWire:

Some of the biggest players (Walmart, Target, Macy’s, Kohl’s, JCPenney and Best Buy) still plan to open on Thanksgiving. But the pendulum is swinging back, and the Mall of America’s announcement that it plans to close on Thursday will be a major influence on other mall operators. It seems clear that the push for earlier “early bird” hours on Black Friday (followed by midnight openings, followed by Thursday openings) has had a diminishing effect on sales — by draining any sense of urgency out of Friday morning shopping. (And the availability of goods online hasn’t helped, either.)

It’s hard for the retailers who insist on being open for Thanksgiving to be the first one to blink, but it seems clear that consumer sentiment is tugging them in that direction.

And this more recent post:

While the reports of the death of Black Friday are greatly exaggerated, there is no doubt that it’s lost importance on the retail calendar. The shift to e-commerce is part of the reason, but the bigger cause is retailers’ greediness in pushing their “early bird” hours earlier and earlier and finally opening on Thanksgiving itself.

My long experience working for a company that knew how to “nail” Black Friday tells me that the event was once as much a social occasion as a way to hunt for deals. Opening earlier and earlier never seems to result in more net sales but actually becomes counterproductive when any sense of urgency about “early birds” flies out the window.